J Periodontal Implant Sci.  2016 Oct;46(5):337-349. 10.5051/jpis.2016.46.5.337.

Randomized controlled clinical trial of 2 types of hydroxyapatite-coated implants on moderate periodontitis patients

• Kim HS
• Yun PY
• Kim YK

• KMID: 2354932
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2016.46.5.337

Abstract

PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the peri-implant tissue conditions and prospective clinical outcomes associated with 2 types of hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implants: (1) fully HA-coated implants and (2) partially HA-coated implants with resorbable blast medium on the coronal portion of the threads.
METHODS
Forty-four partially edentulous patients were randomly assigned to undergo the placement of 62 HA-coated implants, and were classified as the control group (partially HA-coated, n=30) and the test group (fully HA-coated, n=32). All patients had chronic periodontitis with moderate crestal bone loss around the edentulous area. The stability and clinical outcomes of the implants were evaluated using the primary and secondary implant stability quotient (ISQ), as well as radiographic, mobility, and peri-implant soft tissue assessments around the implants. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Mann-Whitney test were used to evaluate differences between and within the 2 groups, with P values <0.05 considered to indicate statistical significance.
RESULTS
The fully HA-coated implants displayed good retention of crestal bone, and insignificant differences were found in annual marginal bone loss between the 2 types of HA-coated implants (P>0.05). No significant differences were found in the survival rate (group I, 100%; group II, 100%) or the success rate (group I, 93.3%; group II, 93.8%). The fully HA-coated implants also did not significantly increase the risk of peri-implantitis (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
The fully HA-coated implants did not lead to an increased risk of peri-implantitis and showed good retention of the crestal bone, as well as good survival and success rates. Our study suggests that fully HA-coated implants could become a reliable treatment alternative for edentulous posterior sites and are capable of providing good retention of the crestal bone.

Keyword

Dental implants; Durapatite; Osseointegration; Periodontitis; Surface properties

MeSH Terms

Chronic Periodontitis
Dental Implants
Durapatite
Humans
Osseointegration
Peri-Implantitis
Periodontitis*
Prospective Studies
Surface Properties
Survival Rate
Dental Implants
Durapatite

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Comparison of the 2 types of implant coatings. (A) Partially hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implant fixture with resorbable blast medium on the coronal portion of the threads (2 mm). (B) Fully HA-coated implant fixture.

• 

  Figure 2 Standardized periapical radiographs. (A) Radiograph taken at the time of provisional crown connection. (B) Radiograph taken 1 year after loading.

• 

  Figure 3 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials flow diagram of the participants and the implants that were placed. HA, hydroxyapatite; RFA, resonance frequency analysis; ISQ, implant stability quotient.

Reference

1. Porter JA, von Fraunhofer JA. Success or failure of dental implants? A literature review with treatment considerations. Gen Dent. 2005; 53:423–432.

2. Wang G, Zreiqat H. Functional coatings or films for hard-tissue applications. Materials (Basel). 2010; 3:3994–4050.

3. Sun L, Berndt CC, Gross KA, Kucuk A. Material fundamentals and clinical performance of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite coatings: a review. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001; 58:570–592.

4. Filiaggi MJ, Coombs NA, Pilliar RM. Characterization of the interface in the plasma-sprayed HA coating/Ti-6Al-4V implant system. J Biomed Mater Res. 1991; 25:1211–1229.

5. Spoerke ED, Murray NG, Li H, Brinson LC, Dunand DC, Stupp SI. A bioactive titanium foam scaffold for bone repair. Acta Biomater. 2005; 1:523–533.

6. Bose S, Tarafder S. Calcium phosphate ceramic systems in growth factor and drug delivery for bone tissue engineering: a review. Acta Biomater. 2012; 8:1401–1421.

7. Yang P, Quan Z, Li C, Kang X, Lian H, Lin J. Bioactive, luminescent and mesoporous europium-doped hydroxyapatite as a drug carrier. Biomaterials. 2008; 29:4341–4347.

8. Meffert RM. Ceramic-coated implant systems. Adv Dent Res. 1999; 13:170–172.

9. Lee JJ, Rouhfar L, Beirne OR. Survival of hydroxyapatite-coated implants: a meta-analytic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000; 58:1372–1379.

10. Whitehead RY, Lucas LC, Lacefield WR. The effect of dissolution on plasma sprayed hydroxylapatite coatings on titanium. Clin Mater. 1993; 12:31–39.

11. Wheeler SL. Eight-year clinical retrospective study of titanium plasma-sprayed and hydroxyapatite-coated cylinder implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996; 11:340–350.

12. Albertini M, Fernandez-Yague M, Lázaro P, Herrero-Climent M, Rios-Santos JV, Bullon P, et al. Advances in surfaces and osseointegration in implantology. Biomimetic surfaces. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015; 20:e316–25.

13. Armitage GC. Development of a classification system for periodontal diseases and conditions. Ann Periodontol. 1999; 4:1–6.

14. Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E Jr, Land NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1987; 2:145–151.

15. Buser D, Weber HP, Lang NP. Tissue integration of non-submerged implants. 1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1990; 1:33–40.

16. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997; 8:161–172.

17. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986; 1:11–25.

18. Cook SD, Kay JF, Thomas KA, Jarcho M. Interface mechanics and histology of titanium and hydroxylapatite-coated titanium for dental implant applications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1987; 2:15–22.

19. Block MS, Kent JN, Kay JF. Evaluation of hydroxylapatite-coated titanium dental implants in dogs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987; 45:601–607.

20. Jarcho M, Kay JF, Gumaer KI, Doremus RH, Drobeck HP. Tissue, cellular and subcellular events at a bone-ceramic hydroxylapatite interface. J Bioeng. 1977; 1:79–92.

21. Yang Y, Kim KH, Ong JL. A review on calcium phosphate coatings produced using a sputtering process--an alternative to plasma spraying. Biomaterials. 2005; 26:327–337.

22. Albrektsson T. Direct bone anchorage of dental implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 50:255–261.

23. Kim YK, Ahn KJ, Yun PY, Kim M, Yang HS, Yi YJ, et al. Effect of loading time on marginal bone loss around hydroxyapatite-coated implants. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 39:161–167.

24. Berglundh T, Gotfredsen K, Zitzmann NU, Lang NP, Lindhe J. Spontaneous progression of ligature induced peri-implantitis at implants with different surface roughness: an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18:655–661.

25. Albouy JP, Abrahamsson I, Persson LG, Berglundh T. Spontaneous progression of peri-implantitis at different types of implants. An experimental study in dogs. I: clinical and radiographic observations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19:997–1002.

26. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res. 1991; 25:889–902.