International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2018 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

A Novel Experimental Model for Dental Implant Research

Murude Yazan, Fethi Atil, Zeynep B Gonen, Ismail D Kocyigit, Umut Tekin

Keywords : Animal, Experimental, Implant, Model

Citation Information : Yazan M, Atil F, Gonen ZB, Kocyigit ID, Tekin U. A Novel Experimental Model for Dental Implant Research. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2018; 7 (2):43-47.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1174

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Introduction: Femur, tibia and iliac bone have been generally preferred at previous experimental implant investigations. Bone mineral density, corticocancellous content of these regions are different from jaws because of having endochondral origins. Immobilization and animal care are difficulties of animal studies used extremities. This study aims to describe a new animal model for experimental dental implant research by using rabbits’ mandibles to eliminate disadvantages of other defined regions. Materials and methods: Custom designed and produced implants were implemented at identified mandibular molar areas of 10 male New Zealand rabbits adequately far away to teeth apices and mental foramen. Four mm lengthened, 2.8 mm diameter SLA Nucleoss (Ýzmir, Turkey) specially produced micro dental implants were placed at identified regions of rabbits’ mandibles. Two implants were used for each rabbit. Osseointegration was observed two months after the operation histomorphology. Results: Osseointegration was not actualized at around three implants and finished successfully without infection at around all other implants. Newly formed osteoid matrix and bone tissue were evaluated in all specimens histologically except three implants. This new mandible implant model presumedly shows more similar results about osseointegration to human experiments because of the intramembranous ossification. This model prevents the movement difficulty and fracture risk caused by extremities usage. Postoperative care gets easier, and surgical approach is more invasive than previously used experimental studies in this model. Conclusion: Specially designed mini implants and more sensitive manipulation are necessities of this new approach. Previously used rabbit models can be compared with this mandible model with regard to implant osseointegration.

PDF Share
  1. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10 year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl, 1977;16:1-132.
  2. Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Osseointegration: A requiem for the periodontal ligament? International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 1991;11:88-91.
  3. Neyt JG, Buckwalter JA, Carroll NC. Use of animal models in musculoskeletal research. Iowa Orthop J 1998;18:118-123.
  4. Schouten C, van den Beucken JJ, de Jonge LT, et al. The effect of alkaline phosphatase coated onto titanium alloys on bone responses in rats. Biomaterials 2009;30(32):6407-6417.
  5. Wang X, Mabrey JD, Agrawal CM. An interspecies comparison of bone fracture properties. Biomed Mater Eng 1998;8(1):1-9.
  6. Martiniakova M, Omelka R, Chrenek P, et al. Changes of femoral bone tissue microstructure in transgenic rabbits. Folia Biol (Praha) 2005;51(5):140-144.
  7. Castaneda S, Largo R, Calvo E, et al. Bone mineral measurements of subchondral and trabecular bone in healthy and osteoporotic rabbits. Skeletal Radiol 2006;35(1):34-41.
  8. Albrektsson, T, Sennerby L, Wennerberg A. State of the art of oral implants. Periodontology 2008;47:15-26.
  9. Susin C, Qahash M, Hall J, et al. Histological and biomechanical evaluation of phosphorylcholine-coated titanium implants. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2008;35:270-275.
  10. Schouten C, Meijer GJ, Van Den Beucken JJ, et al. A novel implantation model for evaluation of bone healing response to dental implants: the goat iliac crest. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010;21(4):414-423.
  11. Benlidayi ME, Tatli U, Kurkcu M, et al. Comparison of bovinederived hydroxyapatite and autogenous bone for secondary alveolar bone grafting in patients with alveolar clefts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;70(1):e95-102.
  12. Lai QG, Sun SL, Zhou XH, et al. Adipose-derived stem cells transfected with pEGFP-OSX enhance bone formation during distraction osteogenesis. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2014;15(5):482- 490.
  13. Veis A, Dabarakis N, Koutrogiannis C, et al. Evaluation of Vertical Bone Regeneration Using Block and Particulate Forms of Bio-Oss Bone Graft: A Histologic Study in the Rabbit Mandible. J Oral Implantol 2015;41(3):e66-72.
  14. Zhang JC, Lu HY, Lv GY, et al. The repair of critical-size defects with porous hydroxyapatite/polyamide nanocomposite: an experimental study in rabbit mandibles. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2010;39(5):469-477.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.