Alumina and zirconia coated vitallium oral endosteal implants in beagles
✍ Scribed by Cranin, A. Norman ;Schnitman, Paul A. ;Rabkin, Michael ;Dennison, Thomas ;Onesto, E. J.
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1975
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 336 KB
- Volume
- 9
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0021-9304
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
The purpose of this study was to assess the addition of a ceramic coating upon a Vitallium implant to increase the implant's biologic acceptability in the oral environment. The mandibular premolar teeth in 9 adult beagle dogs were removed bilaterally and these areas allowed to heal for 6 weeks. Ceramic coating with either AI,O, or ZrO, was carried out by flame spray deposition upon Vitallium anchor implants (9 of each), and the implants placed into the 18 healed premolar areas. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was conducted by 2 independent investigators over a 32 week period. Implants which exhibited mobility greater than I 1 on a scale of 0 to 111, at intervals of one-half, were judged unsatisfactory. After 19 weeks, all 9 AI,O, coated implants and 5 ZrO, coated implants were rated unsatisfactory. After 32 weeks, 4 ZrO, coated implants were in situ with 0 or I mobility. Radiographically the width of the peri-implant space increased in direct proportion to both time and mobility. Histologic sections demonstrated encapsulating dense fibrous connective tissue which was oriented parallel to both ZrO, and AI,O, implants. Results suggest the zirconia used is a superior ceramic coating to the alumina. Neither seemed to increase biologic acceptability over uncoated Vitallium implants.