Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2025
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Impact of lattice versus solid structure of 3D-printed multiroot dental implants using Ti-6Al-4V: a preclinical pilot
Jungwon Lee1,2, Ling Li1, Hyun-Young Song1
1Department of Periodontology and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Purpose:
Various studies have investigated 3-dimensional (3D)-printed implants using Ti-6Al-4V powder; however, multi-root 3D-printed implants have not been fully investigated. The purpose of this study was to explore the stability of multirooted 3D-printed implants with lattice and solid structures. The secondary outcomes were comparisons between the 2 types of 3D-printed implants in micro-computed tomographic and histological analyses.
Methods:
Lattice- and solid-type 3D-printed implants for the left and right mandibular third premolars in beagle dogs were fabricated. Four implants in each group were placed immediately following tooth extraction. Implant stability measurement and periapical X-rays were performed every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Peri-implant bone volume/tissue volume (BV/TV) and bone mineral density (BMD) were measured by micro-computed tomography. Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) were measured in histomorphometric analyses.
Results:
All 4 lattice-type 3D-printed implants survived. Three solid-type 3D-printed implants were removed before the planned sacrifice date due to implant mobility. A slight, gradual increase in implant stability values from implant surgery to 4 weeks after surgery was observed in the lattice-type 3D-printed implants. The marginal bone change of the surviving solid-type 3D-printed implant was approximately 5 mm, whereas the value was approximately 2 mm in the lattice-type 3D-printed implants. BV/TV and BMD in the lattice type 3D-printed implants were similar to those in the surviving solid-type implant. However, BIC and BAFO were lower in the surviving solid-type 3D-printed implant than in the lattice-type 3D-printed implants.
Conclusions:
Within the limits of this preclinical study, 3D-printed implants of double-rooted teeth showed high primary stability. However, 3D-printed implants with interlocking structures such as lattices might provide high secondary stability and successful osseointegration.
More Related Videos
06:12Plasma Polishing as a New Polishing Option to Reduce the Surface Roughness of Porous Titanium Alloy for 3D Printing
Published on: April 28, 2023
12:19Multi-Scale Modification of Metallic Implants With Pore Gradients, Polyelectrolytes and Their Indirect Monitoring In vivo
Published on: July 1, 2013