The Experts below are selected from a list of 41163 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bernd Stadlinger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a systematic review and meta analysis on the influence of biological Implant Surface coatings on periImplant bone formation
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2016Co-Authors: Gregor J. Jenny, Johanna Jauernik, Klaus Wilhelm Grätz, Martin Rucker, Martin Bigler, Susanne Bierbaum, Bernd StadlingerAbstract:This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the influence of biological Implant Surface coatings on periImplant bone formation in comparison to an uncoated titanium reference Surface in experimental large animal models. The analysis was structured according to the PRISMA criteriae. Of the1077 studies, 30 studies met the inclusion criteriae. Nineteen studies examined the bone Implant contact (BIC) and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the mean increase in BIC for the test Surfaces compared to the reference Surfaces was 3.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI -3.9-11.2, p = 0.339). Analyzing the increase in BIC for specific coated Surfaces in comparison to uncoated reference Surfaces, inorganic Surface coatings showed a significant mean increase in BIC of 14.7 pp (95% CI 10.6-18.9, p < 0.01), extracellular matrix (ECM) Surface coatings showed an increase of 10.0 pp (95% CI 4.4-15.6, p < 0.001), and peptide coatings showed a statistical trend with 7.1 pp BIC increase (95% CI -0.8-15.0, p = 0.08). In this review, no statistically significant difference could be found for growth factor Surface coatings (observed difference -3.3 pp, 95% CI -16.5-9.9, p = 0.6). All analyses are exploratory in nature. The results show a statistically significant effect of inorganic and ECM coatings on periImplant bone formation. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 104A: 2898-2910, 2016.
-
effect of biological Implant Surface coatings on bone formation applying collagen proteoglycans glycosaminoglycans and growth factors
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, 2008Co-Authors: Bernd Stadlinger, Ricardo Berhardt, Eckart Pilling, Susanne Bierbaum, Dieter Scharnweber, Uwe EckeltAbstract:Objectives The aim of the present study was to evaluate six different Implant Surface coatings with respect to bone formation. Being major structural components of the extracellular matrix, collagen, the non-collagenous components decorin/chondroitin sulphate (CS) and the growth factors TGF-β1/BMP-4 served in different combinations as coatings of experimental titanium Implants.
Michael Atlan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Surface Texturization of Breast Implants Impacts Extracellular Matrix and Inflammatory Gene Expression in Asymptomatic Capsules
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2020Co-Authors: Isabelle Brigaud, Michael Atlan, Charles Garabedian, Nathalie Bricout, Laurent Pieuchot, Arnaud Ponche, Raphaël Deltombe, Rémi Delille, Maxence Bigerelle, Karine AnselmeAbstract:Background: Texturing processes have been designed to improve biocompatibility and mechanical anchoring of breast Implants. However, a high degree of texturing has been associated with severe abnormalities. In this study, the authors aimed to determine whether Implant Surface topography could also affect physiology of asymptomatic capsules. Methods: The authors collected topographic measurements from 17 different breast Implant devices by interferometry and radiographic microtomography. Morphologic structures were analyzed statistically to obtain a robust breast Implant Surface classification. The authors obtained three topographic categories of textured Implants (i.e., “peak and valleys,” “open cavities,” and “semiopened cavities”) based on the cross-sectional aspects. The authors simultaneously collected 31 Baker grade I capsules, sorted them according to the new classification, established their molecular profile, and examined the tissue organization. Results: Each of the categories showed distinct expression patterns of genes associated with the extracellular matrix (Timp and Mmp members) and inflammatory response (Saa1, Tnsf11, and Il8), despite originating from healthy capsules. In addition, slight variations were observed in the organization of capsular tissues at the histologic level. Conclusions: The authors combined a novel Surface Implant classification system and gene profiling analysis to show that Implant Surface topography is a bioactive cue that can trigger gene expression changes in surrounding tissue, even in Baker grade I capsules. The authors’ new classification system avoids confusion regarding the word “texture,” and could be transposed to Implant ranges of every manufacturer. This new classification could prove useful in studies on potential links between specific texturizations and the incidence of certain breast-Implant associated complications.
-
Breast Implant Surface texture impacts host tissue response
Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 2018Co-Authors: Michael Atlan, Gina Nuti, Sherri Decker, Hongpeng Wang, Tracyann PerryAbstract:Background Surface texture of a breast Implant influences tissue response and ultimately device performance. Characterizing differences among available Surface textures is important for predicting and optimizing performance. Methods Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray computed tomography (CT)-imaging were used to characterize the topography and Surface area of 12 unique breast Implant Surface textures from seven different manufacturers. Samples of these Surface textures were Implanted in rats, and tissue response was analyzed histologically. In separate experiments, the force required to separate host tissue from the Implant Surface texture was used as a measure of tissue adherence. Results SEM imaging of the top and cross section of the Implant shells showed that the textures differed qualitatively in evenness of the Surface, presence of pores, size and openness of the pores, and the depth of texturing. X-ray CT imaging reflected these differences, with the texture Surface area of the anterior of the shells ranging from 85 to 551 mm2, which was 8–602% greater than that of a flat Surface. General similarities based on the physical structure of the Surfaces were noted among groups of textures. In the rat models, with increasing Surface texture complexity, there was increased capsule disorganization, tissue ingrowth, and tissue adherence. Conclusions Surface area and topography of breast Implant textures are important factors contributing to tissue ingrowth and adherence. Based on Surface area characteristics and measurements, it is possible to group the textures into four classifications: smooth/nanotexture (80–100 mm2), microtexture (100–200 mm2), macrotexture (200–300 mm2), and macrotexture-plus (> 300 mm2).
Gustavo Mendonca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the effects of Implant Surface nanoscale features on osteoblast specific gene expression
Biomaterials, 2009Co-Authors: Gustavo Mendonca, Francisco J L Aragao, Daniela Baccelli Silveira Mendonca, L G P Simoes, Andre Luiz Araujo, E R Leite, Wagner R Duarte, Lyndon F CooperAbstract:This study investigated the influence of nanoscale Implant Surface features on osteoblast differentiation. Titanium disks (20.0 x 1.0 mm) with different nanoscale materials were prepared using sol-gel-derived coatings and characterized by scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy and analyzed by X-ray Photoelectron Spectrometer. Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells (hMSCs) were cultured on the disks for 3-28 days. The levels of ALP, BSP, Runx2, OCN, OPG, and OSX mRNA and a panel of 76 genes related to osteogenesis were evaluated. Topographical and chemical evaluation confirmed nanoscale features present on the coated Surfaces only. Bone-specific mRNAs were increased on Surfaces with superimposed nanoscale features compared to Machined (M) and Acid etched (Ac). At day 14, OSX mRNA levels were increased by 2-, 3.5-, 4- and 3-fold for Anatase (An), Rutile (Ru), Alumina (Al), and Zirconia (Zr), respectively. OSX expression levels for M and Ac approximated baseline levels. At days 14 and 28 the BSP relative mRNA expression was significantly up-regulated for all Surfaces with nanoscale coated features (up to 45-fold increase for Al). The PCR array showed an up-regulation on Al coated Implants when compared to M. An improved response of cells adhered to nanostructured-coated Implant Surfaces was represented by increased OSX and BSP expressions. Furthermore, nanostructured Surfaces produced using aluminum oxide significantly enhanced the hMSC gene expression representative of osteoblast differentiation. Nanoscale features on Ti Implant substrates may improve the osseointegration response by altering adherent cell response.
-
nanostructured alumina coated Implant Surface effect on osteoblast related gene expression and bone to lmplant contact in vivo
International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2009Co-Authors: Gustavo Mendonca, Lyndon F Cooper, L G P Simoes, Andre Luiz Araujo, E R Leite, Wagner R Duarte, Daniela Baccelli Silveira Mendocga, Francisco J L AragaoAbstract:Purpose The use of nanotechnology to enhance endosseous Implant Surfaces may improve the clinical control of interfacial osteoblast biology. This study investigated the influence of a nanostructure-coated Implant Surface on osteoblast differentiation and its effects on bone-to-Implant contact (BIC) and removal torque values. Materials and methods Titanium disks were machined (M) or machined and subsequently treated by acid etching (Ac) or by dipping in an aluminum oxide solution (Al2O3). Surfaces were characterized by scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, and x-ray microanalysis. For the in vitro experiment, rat mesenchymal stem cells (rMSCs) were grown in osteogenic supplements on the disk Surfaces for 3 days. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to measure mRNA levels of several gene products (bone sialoprotein, osteocalcin, osteopontin, and RUNX-2). For the in vivo experiment, titanium Implants were placed in rat tibiae and harvested after 3 to 21 days for measurement of bone-specific mRNA levels by real-time PCR. Removal torque and BIC were measured 3 to 56 days after placement. Results Average height deviation (Sa, in nm) values for M, Ac, and Al2O3 Implants were 86.5, 388.4, and 61.2, respectively. Nanostructured Al2O3 topographic features applied to machined Implants promoted MSC commitment to the osteoblast phenotype. Greater bone-specific gene expression was observed in tissues adjacent to Al2O3 Implants, and associated increases in BIC and torque removal were noted. Conclusion Nanostructured alumina may directly influence cell behavior to enhance osseointegration.
-
advancing dental Implant Surface technology from micron to nanotopography
Biomaterials, 2008Co-Authors: Daniela B S Mendonca, Gustavo Mendonca, Francisco J L Aragao, Lyndon F CooperAbstract:Current trends in clinical dental Implant therapy include use of endosseous dental Implant Surfaces embellished with nanoscale topographies. The goal of this review is to consider the role of nanoscale topographic modification of titanium substrates for the purpose of improving osseointegration. Nanotechnology offers engineers and biologists new ways of interacting with relevant biological processes. Moreover, nanotechnology has provided means of understanding and achieving cell specific functions. The various techniques that can impart nanoscale topographic features to titanium endosseous Implants are described. Existing data supporting the role of nanotopography suggest that critical steps in osseointegration can be modulated by nanoscale modification of the Implant Surface. Important distinctions between nanoscale and micron-scale modification of the Implant Surface are presently considered. The advantages and disadvantages of nanoscale modification of the dental Implant Surface are discussed. Finally, available data concerning the current dental Implant Surfaces that utilize nanotopography in clinical dentistry are described. Nanoscale modification of titanium endosseous Implant Surfaces can alter cellular and tissue responses that may benefit osseointegration and dental Implant therapy.
Karine Anselme - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Surface Texturization of Breast Implants Impacts Extracellular Matrix and Inflammatory Gene Expression in Asymptomatic Capsules
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2020Co-Authors: Isabelle Brigaud, Michael Atlan, Charles Garabedian, Nathalie Bricout, Laurent Pieuchot, Arnaud Ponche, Raphaël Deltombe, Rémi Delille, Maxence Bigerelle, Karine AnselmeAbstract:Background: Texturing processes have been designed to improve biocompatibility and mechanical anchoring of breast Implants. However, a high degree of texturing has been associated with severe abnormalities. In this study, the authors aimed to determine whether Implant Surface topography could also affect physiology of asymptomatic capsules. Methods: The authors collected topographic measurements from 17 different breast Implant devices by interferometry and radiographic microtomography. Morphologic structures were analyzed statistically to obtain a robust breast Implant Surface classification. The authors obtained three topographic categories of textured Implants (i.e., “peak and valleys,” “open cavities,” and “semiopened cavities”) based on the cross-sectional aspects. The authors simultaneously collected 31 Baker grade I capsules, sorted them according to the new classification, established their molecular profile, and examined the tissue organization. Results: Each of the categories showed distinct expression patterns of genes associated with the extracellular matrix (Timp and Mmp members) and inflammatory response (Saa1, Tnsf11, and Il8), despite originating from healthy capsules. In addition, slight variations were observed in the organization of capsular tissues at the histologic level. Conclusions: The authors combined a novel Surface Implant classification system and gene profiling analysis to show that Implant Surface topography is a bioactive cue that can trigger gene expression changes in surrounding tissue, even in Baker grade I capsules. The authors’ new classification system avoids confusion regarding the word “texture,” and could be transposed to Implant ranges of every manufacturer. This new classification could prove useful in studies on potential links between specific texturizations and the incidence of certain breast-Implant associated complications.
Stijn Vervaeke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improvement of quality of life with Implant supported mandibular overdentures and the effect of Implant type and surgical procedure on bone and soft tissue stability a three year prospective split mouth trial
Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Ron Doornewaard, Stijn Vervaeke, Carine Matthys, Hugo De Bruyn, Maarten Glibert, Ewald M BronkhorstAbstract:In fully edentulous patients, the support of a lower dental prosthesis by two Implants could improve the chewing ability, retention, and stability of the prosthesis. Despite high success rates of dental Implants, complications, such as peri-Implantitis, do occur. The latter is a consequence of crestal bone loss and might be related to the Implant Surface and peri-Implant soft tissue thickness. The aim of this paper is to describe the effect of Implant Surface roughness and soft tissue thickness on crestal bone remodeling, peri-Implant health, and patient-centered outcomes. The mandibular overdenture supported by two Implants is used as a split-mouth model to scrutinize these aims. The first study compared Implants placed equicrestal to Implants placed biologically (i.e., dependent on site-specific soft tissue thickness). The second clinical trial compared Implants with a minimally to a moderately rough Implant neck. Both studies reported an improvement in oral health-related quality of life and a stable peri-Implant health after three years follow-up. Only equicrestal Implant placement yielded significantly higher Implant Surface exposure, due to the establishment of the biologic width. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that an Implant supported mandibular overdenture significantly improves the quality of life, with limited biologic complications and high survival rates of the Implants.
-
adapting the vertical position of Implants with a conical connection in relation to soft tissue thickness prevents early Implant Surface exposure a 2 year prospective intra subject comparison
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2018Co-Authors: Stijn Vervaeke, Carine Matthys, Rima Nassar, Veronique Christiaens, Jan Cosyn, Hugo De BruynAbstract:Aim: To evaluate the effect of soft tissue thickness on bone remodelling and to investigate whether Implant Surface exposure can be avoided by adapting the vertical Implant position in relation to the soft tissue thickness. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five patients received two non-splinted Implants supporting an overdenture in the mandible. Soft tissue thickness was measured using bone sounding and ultrasonically. One Implant was installed equicrestally (control), and the vertical position of the second Implant was adapted to the site-specific soft tissue thickness (test). Crestal bone levels were determined on digital peri-apical radiographs and compared with baseline (Implant placement). Results: Twenty-five patients were consecutively treated. No Implants failed during the follow-up. A significant correlation was observed between soft tissue thickness and bone level alterations after 6 months (ultrasound ICC=0.610; bone sounding ICC = 0.641) with inferior bone levels for equicrestal Implants when thin tissues are present. Subcrestal Implants showed significantly better bone levels after 6-month (n = 24, 0.04 mm versus 0.72 mm; p < .001), 1-year (n = 24, 0.03mm versus 0.77 mm; p < .001) and 2-year follow-up (n = 24, 0.04 mm versus 0.73 mm; p<.001). Conclusion: Initial bone remodelling was affected by soft tissue thickness. Anticipating biologic width re-establishment by adapting the vertical position of the Implant seemed highly successful to avoid Implant Surface exposure.
-
Implant Surface roughness and patient factors on long term peri Implant bone loss
Periodontology 2000, 2017Co-Authors: Hugo De Bruyn, Veronique Christiaens, Jan Cosyn, Ron Doornewaard, Magnus Jacobsson, Wolfgang Jacquet, Stijn VervaekeAbstract:Dental Implant placement is a common treatment procedure in current dental practice. High Implant survival rates as well as limited peri-Implant bone loss has been achieved over the past decades due to continuous modifications of Implant design and Surface topography. Since the turn of the millennium, Implant Surface modifications have focused on stronger and faster bone healing. This has not only yielded higher Implant survival rates but also allowed modifications in surgical as well as prosthetic treatment protocols such as immediate Implant placement and immediate loading. Stable crestal bone levels have been considered a key factor in Implant success because it is paramount for long-term survival, aesthetics as well as peri-Implant health. Especially during the past decade, clinicians and researchers have paid much attention to peri-Implant health and more specifically to the incidence of bone loss. This could furthermore increase the risk for peri-Implantitis, the latter often diagnosed as ongoing bone loss and pocket formation beyond the normal biological range in the presence of purulence or bleeding on probing. Information on the effect of Surface topography on bone loss or peri-Implantitis, a disease process that is to be evaluated in the long-term, is also scarce. Therefore, the current narrative review discusses whether long-term peri-Implant bone loss beyond physiological bone adaptation is affected by the Surface roughness of dental Implants. Based on comparative studies, evaluating Implants with comparable design but different Surface roughness, it can be concluded that average peri-Implant bone loss around the moderately rough and minimally rough Surfaces is less than around rough Surfaces. However, due to the multifactorial cause for bone loss the clinical impact of Surface roughness alone on bone loss and peri-Implantitis risk seems rather limited and of minimal clinical importance. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that certain patient factors, such as a history of periodontal disease and smoking, lead to more peri-Implant bone loss.
