华西口腔医学杂志

• 专栏论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

两种钛种植体与骨结合界面的组织学研究

丁仲鹃1,董 强1,肖旭辉1,董宝财1,王 静1,梁 星2   

  1. 1.昆明医学院口腔医学院 口腔修复科,云南昆明650031;2.四川大学华西口腔医院 口腔修复科,四川成都610041
  • 收稿日期:2004-06-25 修回日期:2004-06-25 出版日期:2004-06-20 发布日期:2004-06-20
  • 通讯作者: 梁 星,Tel:13608024551
  • 作者简介:丁仲鹃(1962-),女,江西人,教授,硕士
  • 基金资助:
    云南省教育厅基金资助项目(9712117)

The Morphological Study of Bone-implant Interfacesin vivo

DING Zhong-juan1, DONG Qiang1, XIAO Xu-hui1, DONG Bao-cai1, WANG Jing1,LIANG Xing2   

  1. 1. College of Stomatology, Kunming Medical College, Kunming650031, China;2. Dept. ofProsthodotics West China College ofStomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu610041,China
  • Received:2004-06-25 Revised:2004-06-25 Online:2004-06-20 Published:2004-06-20

摘要:

目的 对两种表面形态不同的钛种植体在不同种植时期骨结合界面情况进行研究。方法 在恒河猴下颌磨牙区分期分别植入CDIC和ITI-TPS钛种植体,采用同体对照的方法,对两种种植体与骨结合界面情况进行组织学观察。结果 口腔检查未见种植体松动及周围组织明显炎症表现。各期种植体骨界面X线影像均未见明显透射暗影,仅种植1个月的CDIC种植体颈部见少量角形吸收。光镜和扫描电镜观察见种植1个月后两种种植体骨界面有少量骨形成;1~3个月ITI-TPS种植体界面骨形成较明显,成骨量统计分析,差异有显著性;种植后1年,两者未见明显差别。结论 无载荷条件下,种植体植入后1~3个月内,ITI-TPS种植体表面骨结合形成优于CDIC种植体。随植入时间的增加,两种种植体均形成良好的骨性结合界面。

关键词: 骨整合, 形态学, 钛种植体, 磨片

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the bone-implant interfaces of two kinds of implants with different surfaces in different time in vivo.Methods CDIC and ITI-TPS solid-screw cylinder pure titanium implants were selected and implanted in the regions of posterior molars of rhesusmonkeys. 1 month, 2 months, 3 months and 1 year after surgery, the bone-implant interfaceswere eval- uated respectively through oral examination, X-ray inspection, lightmicroscope and scanning electron microscope (SEM) observa- tion.Results None of the implants was loose. Soft tissue around implants appeared no inflammation. There were no apparent transparent shadow around the implants interfaces in X-ray photos except little angle-shaped absorption was showed in neck region of CDIC implants of one-month. New bone was observed around implants of one-month through light microscope and SEM. More bone growing around ITI implants were seen than that around CDIC implants except the interfaces of one-year.Conclusion The osseointegration of ITI implants are better than that of CDIC implants during three months after implanting without loading, The bone formation at the interfaces of ITI and CDIC implants has no significant difference after one year without loading.

Key words: osseointegration, morphology, titanium implants, grinding slice