Histological evaluation of micro implant-bone interface following immediate versus delayed loading in a dog’s mandibular bone

Abstract

  Histological evaluation of micro implant-bone interface following immediate versus delayed loading in a dog’s mandibular bone

  

  Dr. Ramazanzadeh BA.,¹ Dr. Fatemi K.,² Dr. Mohtasham N.,³ Dr. Jahanbin A.,¹ Dr. Sardari K.,⁴

  Dr. Shakeri MT.,⁵ Dr. Sadeghian H.,⁶ Dr. Dehghani-Mohammadabadi M.⁷

 ^ 

  ¹ Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics , School of Dentistry , Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran. ² Assistant Professor,^ Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran. ³ Associate Professor, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran. ⁴ Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, School of Veterinary , Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran . ⁵ Associate Professor, Department of Public Health , School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran. ⁶ Postgraduate Student, Department of Pathology , School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mashhad, Iran. ⁷ Assistant Professor,^ Department of Orthodontics , School of Dentistry , Yazd University of Medical Sciences. Yazd, Iran.

  

  (Received 16 Sep, 2009 Accepted 16 August, 2010)

  

  Abstract

  

  Background and Aim : ُ Skeletal anchorage devices such as microimplants are successful attempts to have absolute anchorage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of immediate and delayed orthodontic loading on maxillary and mandibular microimplants regarding histologic responses and bone implant contact (BIC) in a dog.

  Materials and Methods : Thirty-two microimplants (Abso Anchor) were bilaterally placed in the mandibular premolar regions of four adult male dogs. The microimplants were divided into loaded and unloaded (control) groups. The control group had two subgroups of 4 and 8 weeks and the loaded group comprised two subgroups of immediate and delayed (after 4 weeks healing period) loading. Loaded samples were subjected to 200g load provided by Ni-Ti coil spring for 4 weeks. The decalcified specimens were prepared for histological examination under light microscope. The microimplants’ surrounding tissue was observed histologically and the bone implant contact (BIC) percentage was calculated in each sample. Three way ANOVA was used to compare BICs in different groups.

  Results : Mobility was detected in two mandibular microimplants, so the survival rate was calculated as 93.7%. BIC values were not significantly different between loaded and unloaded groups, and between immediate and delayed loaded groups.

  Conclusion : Immediate or delayed loading of microimplants does not lead to significant difference in the bone-microimplant contact.

  Key words : Microimplant- Orthodontic loading-Anchorage.

 

  Corresponding Author : Dr. Dehghani-Mohammadabadi M ., Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics , School of Dentistry, Yazd University of Medical Sciences. Yazd, Iran.

  e.mail: dehghanimm841@mums.ac.ir