Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective: Evaluation of the in vivo bone response of two innovative titanium surfaces ytterbium laser active fiber obtained (L1-L2) compared to a sandblasted and acid etched (SBAE) during early phase of osseointegration. Material and Methods: Three implant groups with the same macroscopic features were obtained (L1-L2-SBAE) to promote specific surface characteristics. Scanning electron microscopy, profilometric evaluation, X-ray spectrometry, and diffraction analysis were performed. For each group, six implants were placed in the tibiae of three Peli Buey sheep, and histologic, histomorphometric analysis, bone to implant contact (BIC), and the Dynamic Osseointegration index (DOI) were performed. Results: During the early phases of osseointegration, the histological and histomorphometric results showed significant differences between L1-L2-SBAE implants. At 15 and 30 days, histological analysis detected a newly bone formation around all specimens with an higher vital bone in L2 compared to L1 and SBAE both in cortical and in poor-quality marrow bone. At same time, histomorphometric analysis showed significantly higher BIC values in L2 (42.1 ± 2.6 and 82.4 ± 2.2) compared to L1 (5.2 ± 3.1 and 56.2 ± 1.3) and SBAE (23.3 ± 3.9 and 77.3 ± 0.4). DOI medium value showed a higher rate in L2 (2.83) compared to SBAE (2.60) and L1 (1.91). Conclusions: With the limitations of this pilot study, it is possible to assess that the titanium surface characteristics, and not the technologies used to obtain the modification, played a crucial role during the osseointegration process. Histological, histomorphometric, BIC, and DOI evaluation showed a significantly higher rate in L2 specimens compared to others, confirming that the implant surface could increase the bone response in cortical or marrow poor quality bone during the initial phases of osseointegration.

Objectives: In the animal model, we aim to evaluate the bone behavior in two innovative and different laser-treated (L1–L2) titanium implants compared to sandblasted and acid-etched (SBAE) used as control. Materials and Methods: A total of twenty-seven dental implants (8.5 × 3.3 mm) used for the study (Sweden & Martina, Due Carraie Padova-Italy) were placed in three Pelibuey female sheep. Implant surface profilometric, contact angle and EDX analysis were detected. After 15, 30 and 90 days, histological, histomorphometric, SEM-EDX analysis and Bone-to-implant Contact (BIC), Dynamic Osseointegration Index (DOI) and Bone Quality Index (BQI) (as Calcium and Phosphorous atomic percentages ratio) were performed. Results: All surfaces showed relevant profilometric and wettability differences. After 15 days, BIC15 showed great differences in L2 (42.1 ± 2.6) compared to L1 (5.2 ± 3.1) and SBAE (23.3 ± 3.9) as well as after 30 days (L2 (82.4 ± 2.2), L1 (56.2 ± 1.3) and SBAE (77.3 ± 0.4)). After 90 days, relevant lower BIC90 values were detected in L1 (68.4 ± 0.2) compared to L2 (86.4 ± 0.1) and SBAE (86.2 ± 0.6). The DOI showed higher rates of bone growth in L2 after 15 (DOI15 = 2.81) and 30 days (DOI30 = 2.83), compared to L1 (DOI15 = 0.38, DOI30 = 3.40) and SBAE (DOI15 = 1.55, DOI30 = 2.58). The DOI90 drastic slowdown in SBAE (0.96), L1 (0.76), and L2 (0.95) confirmed the Early Osseointegration (EO) as a crucial phase. Moreover, before loading, the lower global BQI in L1 (Ca 44.43 ± 0.08–P 46.14 ± 5.15) and SBAE (Ca 45.31 ± 2.08–P 48.28 ± 1.12) compared to L2 (Ca 79.81 ± 2.08–P 81.85 ± 3.14) allows to assert that osseointegration process and bone healing could not be considered complete if compared to the native bone. Conclusions: The BIC, DOI, and BQI results showed that osseointegration is a dynamic process, confirming the crucial role of surface characteristics able to influence it, especially the early osseointegration (EO) phase. The short-time L2 implants’ higher bone quantity and quality results, compared to L1 and SBAE, suggested the fundamental role of this innovative laser-obtained surface in “secondary stability” and predictable long-term clinical outcomes.