Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of minicono abutment on implant surrounding tissue healing and bone resorption on implants placed in healed bone. An experimental study in dogs

José Luis Calvo-Guirado; Marta Belén Cabo-Pastor; Francisco Martínez-Martínez; Miguel Ángel Garcés-Villalá; Félix de Carlos-Villafranca; Nuria García-Carrillo; Manuel Fernández-Domínguez; José Luis Calvo-Guirado; Marta Belén Cabo-Pastor; Francisco Martínez-Martínez; Miguel Ángel Garcés-Villalá; Félix de Carlos-Villafranca; Nuria García-Carrillo; Manuel Fernández-Domínguez

doi:10.3934/bioeng.2023013

AIMS Bioengineering

2023, Volume 10, Issue 3: 183-201. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2023013

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of minicono abutment on implant surrounding tissue healing and bone resorption on implants placed in healed bone. An experimental study in dogs

1.
Department of Research, Health Sciences Faculty, Autonomous. University of Chile, 7500912, Chile; Private Practice Murcia, Murcian Biomedical Research Institute, IMIB, Spain
2.
Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Cardenal Herrera University, C.E.U, 46001 Valencia, Spain
3.
Department of Traumatology, University Hospital Virgen of Arrixaca, 30120, El Palmar, Murcia, Murcian Biomedical Research Institute, IMIB, Spain
4.
Department of Implant and Biomaterial Research, Jesus Heart Foundation, San Juan, 5400, Argentina
5.
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, Oviedo University, 33001 Asturias, Spain
6.
Department of Veterinary, University of Murcia, 30007 Murcia, Spain, Murcian Biomedical Research Institute, IMIB, Spain
7.
Department of Dentistry, Camilo José Cela University, 28001 Madrid, Spain

Received: 03 June 2023 Revised: 28 July 2023 Accepted: 28 July 2023 Published: 14 August 2023

The objective of this evaluation was to measure the width and length of connective tissue (CT) and crestal bone resorption (CBR) related to minicono® abutment inserted in conical connection dental implants, which were placed crestal and subcrestally in a dog's mandible.

Materials and Methods
Forty-eight Top DM implants with the same coronal diameter were placed at the crestal level, 1 mm (test 1 group) and 2 mm (test 2 group) positions underneath buccal-lingual bone crests. Dental implants used in the study were separated into three groups of 16 implants each. The implants were randomly inserted into healed bone after two months post-extraction sockets of three lower premolars, and first molar, bilaterally in six male fox hound dogs. One 3 mm minicono height abutment was connected to conical connection implants placed at the crestal level (control), 1 mm (test 1) and 2 mm (test 2) positions under buccal-lingual crests.

Results
All abutments and implants used were clinically and histologically integrated into the bone-soft tissue. Soft tissue behavior was observed at eight and 12 weeks in all test groups, displaying similar quantitative findings with significant differences (p > 0.05). However, crestal bone loss was significantly greater at the buccal side around that control group compared to the test 1 and 2 groups. The difference values between groups at the implant shoulder to the top of the lingual bone crest (IS-LBC) and the implant shoulder to the top of the buccal bone crest (IS-BBC) were significantly greater for the test 2 group in comparison with the other two groups (p < 0.05) at eight weeks. In addition, crestal bone resorption (CBR) increased in the crestal group at twelve weeks, but it was reduced for the test 1 and test 2 groups in implants placed sub-crestally (p < 0.05).

Conclusions
Crestal bone loss could be reduced using a 3 mm high abutment on implants submerged below the bone crest from 1 to 2 mm positions.
- collar design,
- implant placement,
- crestal placement,
- sub-crestal placement soft tissue height,
- minicono abutment,
- transmucosal abutment
Citation: José Luis Calvo-Guirado, Marta Belén Cabo-Pastor, Francisco Martínez-Martínez, Miguel Ángel Garcés-Villalá, Félix de Carlos-Villafranca, Nuria García-Carrillo, Manuel Fernández-Domínguez. Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of minicono abutment on implant surrounding tissue healing and bone resorption on implants placed in healed bone. An experimental study in dogs[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2023, 10(3): 183-201. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2023013

Related Papers:

Abstract

The objective of this evaluation was to measure the width and length of connective tissue (CT) and crestal bone resorption (CBR) related to minicono® abutment inserted in conical connection dental implants, which were placed crestal and subcrestally in a dog's mandible.

Materials and Methods

Forty-eight Top DM implants with the same coronal diameter were placed at the crestal level, 1 mm (test 1 group) and 2 mm (test 2 group) positions underneath buccal-lingual bone crests. Dental implants used in the study were separated into three groups of 16 implants each. The implants were randomly inserted into healed bone after two months post-extraction sockets of three lower premolars, and first molar, bilaterally in six male fox hound dogs. One 3 mm minicono height abutment was connected to conical connection implants placed at the crestal level (control), 1 mm (test 1) and 2 mm (test 2) positions under buccal-lingual crests.

Results

All abutments and implants used were clinically and histologically integrated into the bone-soft tissue. Soft tissue behavior was observed at eight and 12 weeks in all test groups, displaying similar quantitative findings with significant differences (p > 0.05). However, crestal bone loss was significantly greater at the buccal side around that control group compared to the test 1 and 2 groups. The difference values between groups at the implant shoulder to the top of the lingual bone crest (IS-LBC) and the implant shoulder to the top of the buccal bone crest (IS-BBC) were significantly greater for the test 2 group in comparison with the other two groups (p < 0.05) at eight weeks. In addition, crestal bone resorption (CBR) increased in the crestal group at twelve weeks, but it was reduced for the test 1 and test 2 groups in implants placed sub-crestally (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Crestal bone loss could be reduced using a 3 mm high abutment on implants submerged below the bone crest from 1 to 2 mm positions.

Conflict of interest

I am an editorial board and I was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. All authors declare that there are no competing interests.

Author contributions

Conceptualization, J.L.C.-G. and F.M.-M.; data curation, M.B.C-P, N.G-C; formal analysis, F.d.C.-V. and M.A.G-V.; funding acquisition, J.L.C.-G., F.M.-M., and M.F.-D.; investigation, J.L.C.-G, N.G-C.; software, F.d.C.-V. and M.A.G.-V.; methodology, F.M.-M., F.d.C.-V., M.B.C-P; project administration, J.L.C.-G.; resources, F.M.-M.; supervision, J.L.C.-G. and F.M.-M.; validation, M.F.-D and M.B.C.-P.; visualization, J.L.C.-G., N.G-C and F.M.-M; writing—original draft preparation, J.L.C.-G. and F.M.-M.; writing—review and editing, J.L.C.-G., F.d.C.-V., M.B.C.-P., F.d.C.-V, M.F.-D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

[1]	Wang RE, Lang NP (2012) Ridge preservation after tooth extraction. Clin Oral Implants Res 23: 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02560.x
[2]	Araújo MG, Sukekava F, Wennström JL, et al. (2005) Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 32: 645-652. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00726.x
[3]	Araújo MG, Lindhe J (2005) Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 32: 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00642.x
[4]	Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J (2004) Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol 31: 820-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00565.x
[5]	Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T (2009) Placement of two-part implants in sites with different buccal and lingual bone heights. J Periodontol 80: 324-329. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080375
[6]	Negri B, Calvo-Guirado JL, Pardo-Zamora G, et al. (2012) Retracted: Peri-implant bone reactions to immediate implants placed at different levels in relation to crestal bone. Part I: a pilot study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 23: 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02158.x
[7]	Negri B, Calvo-Guirado JL, Ramírez-Fernández MP, et al. (2012) Retracted: Peri-implant bone reactions to immediate implants placed at different levels in relation to crestal bone. Part II: a pilot study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 23: 236-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02290.x
[8]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Aguilar-Salvatierra A, Gomez-Moreno G, et al. (2014) Histological, radiological and histomorphometric evaluation of immediate vs. non-immediate loading of a zirconia implant with surface treatment in a dog model. Clin Oral Implants Res 25: 826-830. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12145
[9]	Degidi M, Piattelli A, Scarano A, et al. (2012) Peri-implant collagen fibers around human cone Morse connection implants under polarized light: a report of three cases. Int J Periodont Res Dent 32: 323-328.
[10]	Fickl S, Zuhr O, Stein JM, et al. (2010) Peri-implant bone level around implants with platform-switched abutments. Int J Oral Max Impl 25: 577-581.
[11]	Valles C, Rodríguez-Ciurana X, Nart J, et al. (2017) Influence of implant neck surface and placement depth on crestal bone changes around platform-switched implants: A clinical and radiographic study in dogs. J Periodontol 88: 1200-1210. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2017.170192
[12]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Gómez-Moreno G, López-Marí L, et al. (2011) Crestal bone loss evaluation in osseotite expanded platform implants: a 5-year study. Clin Oral Implants Res 22: 1409-1414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02130.x
[13]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Ortiz-Ruiz AJ, Negri B, et al. (2010) Histological and histomorphometric evaluation of immediate implant placement on a dog model with a new implant surface treatment. Clin Oral Implants Res 21: 308-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01841.x
[14]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Cambra J, Tarnow DP (2009) The effect of interimplant distance on the height of the interimplant bone crest when using platform-switched implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 29: 141-151.
[15]	Delgado-Ruiz RA, Calvo-Guirado JL, Abboud M, et al. (2015) Connective tissue characteristics around healing abutments of different geometries: new methodological technique under circularly polarized light. Clin Implant Dent R 17: 667-680. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12161
[16]	Delgado-Ruiz RA, Calvo-Guirado JL, Abboud M, et al. (2015) Connective tissue characteristics around healing abutments of different geometries: new methodological technique under circularly polarized light. Clin Implant Dent R 17: 667-680. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12161
[17]	Negri B, Calvo Guirado JL, Maté Sánchez de Val JE, et al. (2014) Peri-implant tissue reactions to immediate nonocclusal loaded implants with different collar design: an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 25: e54-e63. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12047
[18]	Froum SJ, Cho SC, Suzuki T, et al. (2018) Epicrestal and subcrestal placement of platform-switched implants: 18 month-result of a randomized, controlled, split-mouth, prospective clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 29: 353-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13129
[19]	Mangano F, Mangano C, Ricci M, et al. (2012) Single-tooth Morse taper connection implants placed in fresh extraction sockets of the anterior maxilla: an aesthetic evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 23: 1302-1307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02307.x
[20]	Donovan R, Fetner A, Koutouzis T, et al. (2010) Crestal bone changes around implants with reduced abutment diameter placed non-submerged and at subcrestal positions: A 1-year radiographic evaluation. J Periodontol 81: 428-434. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090317
[21]	Rodríguez X, Vela X, Calvo-Guirado JL, et al. (2012) Effect of platform switching on collagen fiber orientation and bone resorption around dental implants: a preliminary histologic animal study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27: 1116-1122.
[22]	Oskarsson M, Otsuki M, Welander M, et al. (2018) Peri-implant tissue healing at implants with different designs and placement protocols: an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 29: 873-880. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13339
[23]	Francisco H, Finelle G, Bornert F, et al. (2021) Peri-implant bone preservation of a novel, self-cutting, and fully tapered implant in the healed crestal ridge of minipigs: submerged vs. transgingival healing. Clin Oral Invest 25: 6821-6832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03970-0
[24]	Nagarajan B, Murthy V, Livingstone D, et al. (2015) Evaluation of crestal bone loss around implants placed at equicrestal and subcrestal levels before loading: a prospective clinical study. J Clin Diagn Res 9: ZC47-ZC50. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/13911.7000
[25]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Boquete-Castro A, Negri B, et al. (2014) Crestal bone reactions to immediate implants placed at different levels in relation to crestal bone. A pilot study in Foxhound dogs. Clin Oral Impl Res 25: 344-351. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12110
[26]	Sotto-Maior BS, Lima CA, Senna PM, et al. (2014) Biomechanical evaluation of subcrestal dental implants with different bone anchorages. Braz Oral Res 28: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2014.vol28.0023
[27]	Cochran DL, Mau LP, Higginbottom FL, et al. (2013) Soft and hard tissue histologic dimensions around dental implants in the canine restored with smaller-diameter abutments: a paradigm shift in peri-implant biology. Int J Oral Max Impl 28: 494-502. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3081
[28]	de Val JEMS, Gómez-Moreno G, Ruiz-Linares M, et al. (2017) Effects of surface treatment modification and implant design in implants placed crestal and subcrestally applying delayed loading protocol. J Craniofac Surg 28: 552-558. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003209
[29]	Calvo-Guirado JL, López-López PJ, Mate Sanchez JE, et al. (2014) Crestal bone loss related to immediate implants in crestal and subcrestal position: a pilot study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 25: 1286-1294. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12267
[30]	Calvo-Guirado JL, Delgado Ruiz RA, Ramírez-Fernández MP, et al. (2016) Retracted: Histological and histomorphometric analyses of narrow implants, crestal and subcrestally placed in severe alveolar atrophy: a study in foxhound dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 27: 497-504. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12569
[31]	Sánchez-Siles M, Muñoz-Cámara D, Salazar-Sánchez N, et al. (2018) Crestal bone loss around submerged and non-submerged implants during the osseointegration phase with different healing abutment designs: a randomized prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 29: 808-812. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12981
[32]	De Siqueira RAC, Savaget Goncalves Junior R, Dos Santos PGF, et al. (2020) Effect of different implant placement depths on crestal bone levels and soft tissue behavior: a 5-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 31: 282-293. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13569
[33]	de Siqueira RAC, Fontão FNGK, Sartori IAM, et al. (2017) Effect of different implant placement depths on crestal bone levels and soft tissue behavior: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 28: 1227-1233. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12946
[34]	Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Linkevicius R, et al. (2020) The influence of submerged healing abutment or subcrestal implant placement on soft tissue thickness and crestal bone stability. A 2-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent R 22: 497-506. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12903
[35]	Linkevicius T, Linkevicius R, Gineviciute E, et al. (2021) The influence of new immediate tissue level abutment on crestal bone stability of subcrestally placed implants: A 1-year randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent R 23: 259-269. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12979
[36]	Madani E, Smeets R, Freiwald E, et al. (2018) Impact of different placement depths on the crestal bone level of immediate versus delayed placed platform-switched implants. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 46: 1139-1146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.05.001
[37]	Uraz A, Isler S C, Cula S, et al. (2019) Platform-switched implants vs platform-matched implants placed in different implant-abutment interface positions: A prospective randomized clinical and microbiological study. Clin Implant Dent R 22: 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12873
[38]	Fernández-Domínguez M, Ortega-Asensio V, Fuentes Numancia E, et al. (2019) Can the macrogeometry of dental implants influence guided bone regeneration in buccal bone defects? Histomorphometric and biomechanical analysis in beagle dogs. J Clin Med 8: 618. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8050618
[39]	Pellicer-Chover H, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, et al. (2016) Impact of crestal and subcrestal implant placement in peri-implant bone: a prospective comparative study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 21: e103-e110. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20747
[40]	Cruz RS, Lemos CAA, de Luna Gomes JM, et al. (2022) Clinical comparison between crestal and subcrestal dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 127: 408-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.11.003
[41]	Palacios-Garzón N, Velasco-Ortega E, López-López J (2019) Bone loss in implants placed at subcrestal and crestal level: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials 12: 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12010154
[42]	Valles C, Rodríguez-Ciurana X, Clementini M, et al. (2018) Influence of subcrestal implant placement compared with equicrestal position on the peri-implant hard and soft tissues around platform-switched implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Invest 22: 555-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2301-1
[43]	Tenenbaum H, Schaaf JF, Cuisinier FJ (2003) Histological analysis of the Ankylos peri-implant soft tissues in a dog model. Implant Dent 12: 259-265. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ID.0000075720.78252.54
[44]	Al Amri MD (2016) Crestal bone loss around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 115: 564-570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.11.002
[45]	Al Amri MD, Alfadda SA, Labban NY, et al. (2018) Comparison of clinical, radiographic, and immunologic inflammatory parameters around crestally and subcrestally placed dental implants: 5-year retrospective results. J Prosthodont 27: 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12637
[46]	Koutouzis T, Adeinat B, Ali A (2019) The influence of abutment macro-design on clinical and radiographic peri-implant tissue changes for guided, placed, and restored implants: a 1-year randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 30: 882-891. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13493
[47]	Fetner M, Fetner A, Koutouzis T, et al. (2015) The effects of subcrestal implant placement on crestal bone levels and bone-to-abutment contact: A microcomputed tomographic and histologic study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30: 1068-1075. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4043
[48]	Thoma DS, Jung UW, Gil A, et al. (2019) The effects of hard and soft tissue grafting and individualization of healing abutments at immediate implants: an experimental study in dogs. J Periodontal Implant Sci 49: 171-184. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2019.49.3.171

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)