Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026
08:41
Calvarial Model of Bone Augmentation in Rabbit for Assessment of Bone Growth and Neovascularization in Bone Substitution Materials
Published on: August 13, 2019
Comparison between bioactive fluoride modified and bioinert anodically oxidized implant surfaces in early bone
Jung-Yoo Choi1, Hyo-Jung Lee, Jae-Up Jang
1Department of Periodontology, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea.
Implant Dentistry
|March 3, 2012
Summary
Bioactive fluoride-modified dental implants showed no significant advantage over bioinert oxidized implants in early bone healing. This study compared bone responses to assess implant surface efficacy for bone integration.
Area of Science:
- Biomaterials Science
- Dental Implantology
- Orthopedic Research
Background:
- Dental implant surface characteristics significantly influence osseointegration.
- Bioactive surfaces are theorized to promote enhanced bone healing compared to bioinert surfaces.
- Fluoride modification is one approach to creating bioactive implant surfaces.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the early bone response to a bioactive fluoride-modified dental implant surface versus a bioinert oxidized surface.
- To evaluate whether fluoride-modified surfaces offer superior bone integration compared to oxidized surfaces.
- To assess bone-to-implant contact and bone area around commercial dental implants with different surface treatments.
Main Methods:
- Comparison of fluoride-modified (Osseospeed) and bioinert oxidized (TiUnite) dental implants.
- Surface characterization using field emission scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive spectroscopy, and confocal laser scanning microscopy.
- In vivo evaluation in rabbits with bicortical placement and gap defects, followed by histological analysis at 2 weeks.
Main Results:
- No significant differences in surface roughness were observed between the two implant types.
- New bone formation nearly filled the gap defects within 2 weeks.
- Histomorphometry showed no statistically significant differences in bone-to-implant contact or bone area.
Conclusions:
- The bioactive fluoride-modified surface did not demonstrate superiority over the bioinert anodized surface in terms of early bone response.
- The findings suggest that, within the study's limitations, both surface types support comparable early osseointegration.
- Further research may be needed to explore long-term effects or different bioactive surface modifications.
