Puisys A, Schlee M, Linkevicius T, Petrakakis P, Tjaden A. Photo-activated implants: a triple-blinded, split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical trial on the resistance to removal torque at various healing intervals.
Clin Oral Investig 2019;
24:1789-1799. [PMID:
31512072 DOI:
10.1007/s00784-019-03041-5]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2018] [Accepted: 08/05/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
Hydrophilic implant surfaces promote faster osseointegration of dental implants with a higher bone-implant contact (BIC) rate. Animal and in vitro studies proved that ultraviolet (UV) irradiation of titanium implants regains hydrophilicity. Clinical impact is still unclear. The objective of this RCT was to assess the removal torque (RT) required to unfix a surface-treated implant (test group) versus the original surface implant (control group) performed at various points in time. The null hypothesis stated that test and control implants will show the same deliberation force at specific time points.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
One hundred eighty partially edentulous patients were randomly assigned to six groups. In single-stage surgery, each patient received one test and one control implant. In total, 180 test and 180 control implants were placed epicrestally. Test implants received a surface treatment with UV irradiation prior to insertion, in order to reduce carbon and enhance hydrophilicity and thus wettability. Maximum RT values for test and control implants were recorded with a torque measuring device at implant placement (T1), after 1 (group 1), 2 (group 2), 3 (group 3), 4 (group 4), 6 (group 5) (T2), and 8 weeks (group 6) of healing. Subsequently, implants were returned to their original position for the continuation of the healing process.
RESULTS
No implant was lost. Age, gender, smoking, implant position, and bone quality could be excluded as confounding factors because of the lack of statistical significance. At T2, RT values were higher for test implants compared with those for control implants, being statistically significant in groups 2, 3, 4, and 6 (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Our data support rejection of the null hypothesis.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Photo-activation of the surface of titanium implants leads to higher resistance to RT forces compared with that of non-treated implants, indicating improved healing and implant stability especially in the early healing phase.
Collapse