Stomatologist № 3 (30) – 2018, pp. 38-42                                                                                                                               Scientific publication


Evaluation of histological changes in peri-implant bone tissue after ultrasound application at early healing stages


S.P. Rubnikovicha, I.S. Khomichb
aMD, PhD, DMSci, Professor, Belarusian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Minsk, Belarus
bMD, PhD, Belarusian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Minsk, Belarus

https://doi.org/10.32993/stomatologist.2018.3(30).1

ABSTRACT
The aim was to study the nature of the morphological changes over time in the bone tissue around the implants under the influence of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in the experiment.
Materials and methods. Experimental studies were carried out on rabbits of the chinchilla breed, with dental implants installed in the tibia – two experimental groups with ultrasound and one control group. The animals were withdrawn from the experiment at 1, 2, 4 and 8 weeks and histological examination of the sections of peri-implant tissues was carried out.
Results. The processes of osseointegration of dental implants in all groups of animals occurred without disrupting the normal process sequence. In the early stages granulation tissue is formed, later it is replaced by fibrous-reticular and coarse-fibrous bone tissue, and at the end – by a more mature lamellar bone tissue. However, the timing and degree of maturation of bone tissue, as well as osseointegration of implants in groups using low-frequency low-intensity pulsed ultrasound and without it differed significantly. The study showed that ultrasound exposure to implants and surrounding tissues induces osteoreparation processes, stimulating neoangiogenesis in granulation and newly formed bone tissue.
Conclusion. Application of ultrasound to implants and subsequent application to the peri-implant tissues during and after dental implantation promotes the formation of bone tissue, identical by the histostructure to the maternal bone.

Keywords: bone regeneration, osteoblasts, ultrasound, dental implants, histology.

References

  1. Khomich I.S., Rubnikovich S.P., Khomich S.F. Dentalnaya implantaciya i protezirovanie u pacienta s saharnym diabetom [Dental implantation and prosthetics in patient with diabetes]. Stomatolog. Minsk. – Stomatologist, Minsk. 2014, no. 3(14), pp. 67-69.
  2. Rubnikovich S.P. Lechenie pacientov s polnoj adentiej verhnej chelyusti sjemnymi protezami s oporoj na dentalnye implantaty [Treatment of patients with fully edentulous maxilla using implant supported dentures]. Stomatolog. Minsk. – Stomatologist, Minsk. 2015, no. 3(18), pp. 29–36.
  3. Rubnikovich S.P., Khomich I.S. Kostnye transplantaty i ih zameniteli dlya ustraneniya defektov i augmentacii chelyustnyx kostey v implantologii i periodontologii [Bone transplants and their substitutes for defect elimination in implantology and periodontology]. Minsk. – Stomatologist, Minsk. 2014, no. 1(12), pp. 77-86.
  4. Albrektsson T. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop. Scand., 1981, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 155–170.
  5. Albrektsson T., Sennerby L., Wennerberg A. State of the art of oral implants. Periodontol. 2000. – 2008, vol. 47, pp. 15–26.
  6. Azuma Y. [et al.] Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates rat femoral fracture healing by acting on the various cellular reactions in the fracture callus. J. of Bone and Miner. Res., 2001, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 671–680.
  7. Barros R.R. [et al.] Effect of biofunctionalized implant surface on osseointegration: a histomorphometric study in dogs. Braz. Dent. J., 2009, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 91–98.
  8. Decker J.F. [et al.] Evaluation of implants coated with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and vacuum-dried using the critical-size supraalveolar peri-implant defect model in dogs. The J. of Periodontol, 2010, vol. 81, no. 12, pp. 1839–1849.
  9. Dyson M., Suckling J. Stimulation of tissue repair by ultrasound: a survey of the mechanisms involved. Physiotherapy, 1978, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 105–108.
  10. Erdogan O., Esen E., Ustün Y., Kürkçü M., Akova T., Gönlüşen G., Uysal H., [et al.] Effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on healing of mandibular fractures: an experimental study in rabbits. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2006, vol. 64(2), pp. 180–188.
  11. Hardjiargyrou M. [et al.] Enhancement of fracture healing by low intensity ultrasound. Clin. Orthop. and Res., 1998, no. 355, pp. 16–29.
  12. Hasuike A. [et al.] In vivo bone regenerative effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in rat calvarial defects. Oral Surg., Oral Med., Oral Pathol., Oral Radiol. and Endod., 2011, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. e12–e20.
  13. Khan Y., Laurencin C.T. Fracture repair with ultrasound: clinical and cell-based evaluation. The J. of Bone and Joint Surg. Am., 2008, vol. 90, suppl. 1, pp. 138–144.
  14. Leung K.S. [et al.] Low intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulates osteogenic activity of human periosteal cells. Clin. Orthop. and Res., 2004, no. 418, pp. 253–259.
  15. Lutz R. [et al.] Biofunctionalization of titanium implants with a biomimetic active peptide (P-15) promotes early osseointegration. Clin. Oral Implants Res., 2010, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 726–734.
  16. Man J., Shelton R.M., Cooper P.R., Scheven B.A. Low-intensity low-frequency ultrasound promotes proliferation and differentiation of odontoblast-like cells. Journal of Endodontics, 2012, vol. 38(5), pp. 608–613.
  17. Mendonca G. [et al.] Advancing dental implant surface technology–from micron- to nanotopography. Biomaterials, 2008, vol. 29, no. 28, pp. 3822–3835.
  18. Naruse K. [et al.] Prolonged endochondral bone healing in senescence is shortened by low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in a manner dependent on COX-2. Ultrasound in Med. & Biol., 2019, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1098–1108.
  19. Novicoff W.N. [et al.] Critical analysis of the evidence for current technologies in bone-healing and repair. The J. of Bone and Joint Surg. Am., 2008, vol. 90, suppl. 1, pp. 85–91.
  20. Pounder N.M., Harrison A.J. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound for fracture healing: A review of the clinical evidence and the associated biological mechanism of action. Ultrasonics., 2008, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 330–338.
  21. Rawool N.M. [et al.] Power doppler assessment of vascular changes during fracture treatment with low-intensity ultrasound. J. of Ultrasound in Med., 2003, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 145–153.
  22. Rutten S. [et al.] Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound increases bone volume, osteoid thickness and mineral apposition rate in the area of fracture healing in patients with a delayed union of the osteotomized fibula. Bone, 2008, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 348–354.
  23. Scheven B.A, Man, J., Millard J.L., Cooper P.R., Lea S.C., Walmsley A.D., Smith A.J. VEGF and odontoblast-like cells: stimulation by low frequency Archives of Oral Biology, 2009, vol. 54(2), pp. 185–91.
  24. Schortinghuis J. [et al.] Ultrasound to stimulate mandibular bone defect healing: a placebo-controlled single-blind study in rats. J. of Oral and Maxillofac. Surg., 2004, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 194–201.
  25. Tobita K. [et al.] Effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulation on callus remodelling in a gap-healing model: Evaluation by bone morphometry using three-dimensional quantitative micro-CT. J. of Bone and Joint Surg., 2011, vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 525–530.
  26. Ueno T. [et al.] Effect of ultraviolet photoactivation of titanium on osseointegration in a rat model. The Int. J. of Oral & Maxillofac. Implants, 2010, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 287–294.

Адрес для корреспонденции: Е-mail: rubnikovichs@mail.ru

Article in the .pdf format