International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 39, Issue 5 , Pages 463-468 , May 2010

The effect of injectable calcium phosphate cement on bone anchorage of titanium implants: an experimental feasibility study in dogs

  • V. Arısan

      Affiliations

    • Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, 34390, Çapa, İstanbul, Turkey
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress: Volkan Arisan, Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, 34390, Çapa, İstanbul, Turkey. Tel.: +90 212 5323218; fax: +90 212 5323254.
  • ,
  • A. Anıl

      Affiliations

    • Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Charite University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • ,
  • J.G. Wolke

      Affiliations

    • Department of Periodontology and Biomaterials, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • ,
  • K. Özer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Istanbul University, 34880, Avcılar, İstanbul, Turkey

,Accepted 12 January 2010.

  • Image Result

    ICAP tube placed in an amalgamator for preparation. (a) Injection tip; (b) powder component; (c) liquid component.

    ICAP tube placed in an amalgamator for preparation. (a) Injection tip; (b) powder component; (c) liquid component.

  • Image Result

    Preparation of the implant beds in proximal tibia.

    Preparation of the implant beds in proximal tibia.

  • Image Result

    ICAP was injected into one of prepared implant beds.

    ICAP was injected into one of prepared implant beds.

  • Image Result

    Implants were inserted into ICAP injected site (arrow) and empty bed (asterisk).

    Implants were inserted into ICAP injected site (arrow) and empty bed (asterisk).

  • Image Result

    Mean removal torque values (Ncm) after 2- and 12-week implantation periods.

    Mean removal torque values (Ncm) after 2- and 12-week implantation periods.

  • Image Result

    Backscatter SEM images of 2-week healed implants. (a) Implant inserted with ICAP. ICAP has penetrated into a large area through the trabecular network (light grey area) and in direct contact with the

    Backscatter SEM images of 2-week healed implants. (a) Implant inserted with ICAP. ICAP has penetrated into a large area through the trabecular network (light grey area) and in direct contact with the native bone (dark grey area). Crack lines are present in the ICAP core in contact with the implant surface (arrows). Resorption of the ICAP is not complete. (b) Implant inserted with ICAP. Non-resorbed ICAP can be observed in the apex of the implant left from the drill space. ICAP is in direct contact with the implant surface and native bone. Fracture lines within the ICAP body reveal the mechanical breakdown of the cement before implant surface rupture (arrows). (c) Control implant. Implant body has detached from native bone with a thin gap along the bone–implant interface.

  • Image Result
    Backscatter SEM images of 12-week healed implants. (a) Implant inserted with ICAP. ICAP is still visible in the area but thinner compared with the level at 2 weeks. Crack lines are present in ICAP cor

    Backscatter SEM images of 12-week healed implants. (a) Implant inserted with ICAP. ICAP is still visible in the area but thinner compared with the level at 2 weeks. Crack lines are present in ICAP core and implant surface (arrows). (b) Implant inserted with ICAP. Cement is vastly resorbed with intact remnants still visible next to implant body (arrows). Implant body has detached from the bone surface area. (c) Control implant. Bone structure can be observed throughout the implant surface. Implant body has detached from the bone surface area.

PII: S0901-5027(10)00007-X

doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2010.01.004

International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 39, Issue 5 , Pages 463-468 , May 2010