Open Access, Peer-reviewed, Quarterly
pISSN 0301-2875
eISSN 2005-3789
    J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2011 Oct;49(4):300-307. Korean.
    Published online Oct 31, 2011.
    https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2011.49.4.300
    Copyright © 2011 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    Original Article

    The effect of PostGraft™ on implants were installed at the tibia of ovariectomized rats

    Chun-Il Cho, DDS, MSD,1 Se-Won Kim, DDS, MSD, PhD,2 Yu-Sung Choi, DDS, MSD,1 and In-Ho Cho, DDS, MSD, PhD1
      • 1Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Dankook University, Korea.
      • 2Oscotec Incorporation, Cheonan, Korea.
    • Corresponding Author: In-Ho Cho. Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, 7-1, Shinbu-dong, Cheonan 330-716, Korea. +82 41 550 1974: Email: cho8511@dankook.ac.kr
    Received September 08, 2011; Revised October 11, 2011; Accepted October 14, 2011.

    Abstract

    Purpose

    This study evaluated PostGraft™ which enhances implant stability and bone density.

    Materials and methods

    Forty eight implants were installed at the tibia of ovariectomized rats. The group administrated with PostGraft™ was the experimental group, and the control group was not administrated. Implant stability was evaluated at the 2nd, 4th and 6th week by Periotest value, bone mineral density, bone-to-implant contact. These values were analyzed statistically with Mann-Whitney U test (P<.05). Histological analysis was evaluated at the 2nd, 4th and 6th week.

    Results

    According to the Periotest® measurement, both experimental and control groups showed decrease in values as time elapsed. Greater decrease was observed in the experimental group but there was no significant difference. By examining the radiographic images, both experimental and control groups showed tendency of increase in bone density. Greater increase was seen in the experimental group but there was no significant difference. According to the bone-to-implant contact measurement, both experimental and control groups showed increase in values as time elapsed. Greater increase was seen in the experimental group. At the 2nd and 4th week, there was no significant difference. But at the 6th week, there was significant difference (P<.05). By histological analysis, both experimental and control groups showed increase in bone formation as time elapsed. In addition, greater increase was seen in the experimental group.

    Conclusion

    It could be concluded that the PostGraft™ medicated group showed better results in the bone density and osseointegration.

    Keywords
    PostGraft™; Implant stability; Periotest value; Bone-to-implant contact; Bone density

    Figures

    Fig. 1
    Schematic diagram of experimented implant blasted with resorbable blasting media (A: Lateral view, B: Occlusal view).

    Fig. 2
    Diagram of Periotest values. Values decreased in both experimental and control groups. There was no siginificant difference (P<.05).

    Fig. 3
    Diagram of bone mineral density values measured with bone mineral densitometer. Values decreased in both experimental and control groups. There was no siginificant difference (P<.05).

    Fig. 4
    Diagram of bone to implant contact (BIC) values. Values increased in both experimental and control groups. *At 6th weeks, there was siginificant difference (P<.05).

    Fig. 5
    Histologic findings of control group after 2 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 6
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 2 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 7
    7. Histologic findings of control group after 4 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 8
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 4 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 9
    Histologic findings of control group after 2 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 10
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 2 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 11
    Histologic findings of control group after 4 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 12
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 4 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 13
    Histologic findings of control group after 4 weeks (×100, cortical bone).

    Fig. 14
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 4 weeks (×100, cortical bone).

    Fig. 15
    Histologic findings of control group after 4 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 16
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 4 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 17
    Histologic findings of control group after 6 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 18
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 6 weeks (×40).

    Fig. 19
    Histologic findings of control group after 6 weeks (×100, cortical bone).

    Fig. 20
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 6 weeks (×100, cortical bone).

    Fig. 21
    Histologic findings of control group after 6 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Fig. 22
    Histologic findings of experimental group after 6 weeks (×100, bone marrow).

    Tables

    Table 1
    Number of specimens of classified groups (N: unit)

    Table 2
    Results of Mann-Whitney U test for Periotest® values

    Table 3
    Results of Mann-Whitney U test for bone mineral density values (unit: %)

    Table 4
    Results of Mann-Whitney U test for bone to implant contact (BIC)values (unit: %)

    References

      1. Sykaras N, Iacopino AM, Marker VA, Triplett RG, Woody RD. Implant materials, designs, and surface topographies: their effect on osseointegration. A literature review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:675–690.
      1. Le Guéhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007;23:844–854.
      1. Cochran DL. A comparison of endosseous dental implant surfaces. J Periodontol 1999;70:1523–1539.
      1. Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155–170.
      1. Kim JK, Kim SW, Kim JY, Ko SY, Kim HM, Baek JH, Ryoo HM, Oh KO. Effect of Rehmannia glutinosa Libosch and Acanthopanax senticosus extracts on osteoblastic activity and proliferation and osteoclastic bone resorption. Korean J Bone Metab 2002;9:133–143.
      1. Zhang RX, Li MX, Jia ZP. Rehmannia glutinosa: review of botany, chemistry and pharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol 2008;117:199–214.
      1. Amano S, Hanazawa S, Hirose K, Ohmori Y, Kitano S. Stimulatory effect on bone resorption of interleukin-1-like cytokine produced by an osteoblast-rich population of mouse calvarial cells. Calcif Tissue Int 1988;43:88–91.
      1. Ritchlin CT, Haas-Smith SA, Li P, Hicks DG, Schwarz EM. Mechanisms of TNF-alpha- and RANKL-mediated osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption in psoriatic arthritis. J Clin Invest 2003;111:821–831.
      1. Park SW, Cho IH. In: The effect of PRF® on the osseointegration and stability of implant. MS thesis. Korea: Department of Prosthodontics, Graduate School Dankook University; 2005.
      1. Kang SJ, Cho IH, Shin SY. The effect of OPB-K® on the osseointegration and stability of implant. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2008;46:31–41.
      1. Choi YS, Kim EK, Kim SW, Cho IH. The efficacy evaluation of PostPlant™ Calcium in dental implant placement. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2010;48:128–134.
      1. Anderson JJ, Garner SC, Mar MH, Boass A, Toverud SU, Parikh I. The ovariectomized, lactating rat as an experimental model for osteopenia: calcium metabolism and bone changes. Bone Miner 1990;11:43–53.
      1. Bagi CM, Mecham M, Weiss J, Miller SC. Comparative morphometric changes in rat cortical bone following ovariectomy and/or immobilization. Bone 1993;14:877–883.
      1. Thompson DD, Simmons HA, Pirie CM, Ke HZ. FDA Guidelines and animal models for osteoporosis. Bone 1995;17:125S–133S.
      1. Ohta H, Suda Y, Makita K, Nozawa S, Nemoto K. Influences of menopause and oophorectomy on bone metabolism and spinal bone mineral content. Nihon Sanka Fujinka Gakkai Zasshi 1991;43:422–428.
      1. Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. Early tissue response to titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical bone. Part I. Light microscope observation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1993;4:240–250.
      1. Masuda T, Salvi GE, Offenbacher S, Felton DA, Cooper LF. Cell and matrix reactions at titanium implants in surgically prepared rat tibiae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:472–485.
      1. Lukas D, Schulte W. Periotest-a dynamic procedure for the diagnosis of the human periodontium. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1990;11:65–75.
      1. Chen MM, Yeh JK, Aloia JF. Effect of ovariectomy on cancellous bone in the hypophysectomized rat. J Bone Miner Res 1995;10:1334–1342.
    MeSH Terms
    Animals
    Bone Density
    Osseointegration
    Osteogenesis
    Rats
    Tibia
    Metrics
    Share
    Figures
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 22

    Tables
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 4

    PERMALINK