| « Prev |
2014 Jul-Sep; Vol 5, No 3:e3 |
Next » |
|
e3 |
The Influence of 1α.25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 Coating on Implant Osseointegration in the Rabbit Tibia J Oral Maxillofac Res 2014;5(3):e3 doi:10.5037/jomr.2014.5303 |
The Influence of 1α.25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 Coating on Implant Osseointegration in the Rabbit Tibia
1Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Oral Implantology, Institute of Health Biosciences, The University of Tokushima Graduate School, Tokushima, Japan.
3Department of Applied Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan.
4Department of Restorative Dentistry, West Virginia University School of Dentistry, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
5Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health sciences, University of Ghent, Belgium.
6Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University, New York, USA.
Corresponding Author:
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology
Malmö University
205 06 Malmö
Sweden
Phone: +46 40 665 8679
Fax: + 46 40 665 8503
E-mail: yoshi11@tokushima-u.ac.jp
ABSTRACT
Objectives: This study aims to evaluate bone response to an implant surface modified by 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 [1.25-(OH)2D3] in vivo and the potential link between 1.25-(OH)2D3 surface concentration and bone response.
Material and Methods: Twenty-eight implants were divided into 4 groups (1 uncoated control, 3 groups coated with 1.25-(OH)2D3 in concentrations of 10-8, 10-7 and 10-6 M respectively), placed in the rabbit tibia for 6 weeks. Topographical analyses were carried out on coated and uncoated discs using interferometer and atomic-force-microscope (AFM). Twenty-eight implants were histologically observed (bone-to-implant-contact [BIC] and new-bone-area [NBA]).
Results: The results showed that the 1.25-(OH)2D3 coated implants presented a tendency to osseointegrate better than the non-coated surfaces, the differences were not significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusions: The effect of 1.25-(OH)2D3 coating to implants suggested possible dose dependent effects, however no statistical differences could be found. It is thought that the base substrate topography (turned) could not sustain sufficient amount of 1.25-(OH)2D3 enough to present significant biologic responses. Thus, development a base substrate that can sustain 1.25-(OH)2D3 for a long period is necessary in future studies.
J Oral Maxillofac Res 2014 (Jul-Sep);5(3):e3
doi:10.5037/jomr.2014.5303
Accepted for publication: 19 August 2014
Keywords: dental implants; vitamin D; drug dose response relationship; histological techniques; bone formation.
|
To cite this article: The Influence of 1α.25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 Coating on Implant Osseointegration in the Rabbit Tibia. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2014;5(3):e3 URL: http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2014/3/e3/v5n3e3ht.htm |
Received: 13 February 2014 | Accepted: 19 August 2014 | Published: 1 October 2014
Copyright: © The Author(s). Published by JOMR under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence, 2014.