Browsing by Keyword "dental implants"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Human study of ion implantation as a surface treatment for dental implants(2013-07) De Maeztu, M. A.; Braceras, I.; Álava, J. I.; Recio, C.; Piñera, M.; Gay-Escoda, C.; INGENIERÍA DE SUPERFICIESThis clinical study evaluated a new surface treatment of ion implantation with CO ions which has previously been subjected to extensive study in animal models. The aim of this work was to assess its effect in humans. Experimental mini-implants were used; half of their longitudinal surface was machined and the other half was treated with CO ion implantation. The study was conducted in healthy volunteer patients who required prosthetic treatment with dental implants, and in accordance with the corresponding ethics committees. Coinciding with the insertion of commercial implants for oral restoration, one or two mini-implants were placed in the upper maxillary tuberosity or in the retromolar trigone of the mandible. The mini-implants were removed with a trephine jointly with a small volume of surrounding bone after a 3-month period. Two evaluation methods were used and both showed a greater degree of bone integration in the mini-implant section that underwent CO ion implantation treatment in comparison with the non-treated surface: 62.9% vs. 57.9%, and 54.8% vs. 46.2%. In addition, no adverse reactions were observed in the surface treatment with CO ion implantation. These results confirm the positive benefits in humans, based on the findings obtained from previous animal experiments.Item Improvement of osseointegration of titanium dental implant surfaces modified with CO ions: a comparative histomorphometric study in beagle dogs(2008-05) De Maeztu, M. A.; Braceras, I.; Alava, J. I.; Gay-Escoda, C.; INGENIERÍA DE SUPERFICIESThe aim of this study was to compare carbon-oxygen (CO) ion implantation as a surface treatment with diamond-like carbon and commercially treated implants, including double acid-etched (Osseotite®), oxidized (TiUnite®) and sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA®), using machine-turned titanium implants as control. A total of 72 dental implants divided into 6 groups were placed in the mandibles of 12 beagle dogs. Evaluation was performed by conventional light transmission microscopy and environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM). The histological results obtained via ESEM demonstrated bone-implant contact percentage (%BIC) for implants treated with CO ion implantation of 61% and 62% at 3 and 6 months, respectively. At the same time points, the values were 48% and 45% for double acid-etched, 46% and 52% for sandblasted and acid-etched, 55% and 46% for oxidized, and 33% and 49% for machine-turned titanium control implants. Values of %BIC were statistically significantly higher in implants treated with CO ion implantation compared to the commercially treated implant group (p = 0.002 and p = 0.025) and the control implants (p = 0.001 and p = 0.032) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the three groups of commercially treated implants. The larger %BIC of the ion-implanted group was observable at an early stage.