Biomechanical and histological evaluation of the osseointegration capacity of two types of zirconia implant.
Biomechanical and histological evaluation of the osseointegration capacity of two types of zirconia implant.
复制标题
两种氧化锆种植体骨整合能力的生物力学和组织学评价
DOI：
10.2147/ijn.s119519
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
8
通讯作者：
Sasaki K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Han JM;Hong G;Lin H;Shimizu Y;Wu Y;Zheng G;Zhang H;Sasaki K
本研究的目的是评估的生物力学和组织学行为的氧化铈稳定的氧化锆-氧化铝纳米复合材料（NanoZr）相比，3摩尔%的氧化钇稳定的四氧化锆多晶（3 Y-TZP）在Sprague道利大鼠。使用圆柱形NanoZr和3 Y-TZP植入物（直径1 mm，长度2 mm）。分别通过扫描白光干涉法和扫描电子显微镜确定植入物表面形态和表面粗糙度。将圆柱形氧化锆植入物放置在Sprague道利大鼠股骨的远端边缘。在第2、4、8周，通过推入试验测量种植体与骨之间的界面剪切强度。使用硬组织切片进行组织学分析。评价骨-种植体接触（BIC）、骨髓区域内种植体周围新骨厚度和破骨细胞数量。3 Y-TZP的平均表面粗糙度（Sa 0.788 μm）显著高于NanoZr（Sa 0.559 μm）。3 Y-TZP和NanoZr的剪切强度在2周时相似，但在4周和8周时NanoZr的剪切强度高于3 Y-TZP。3 Y-TZP和NanoZr的骨髓区域内的平均BIC值在2周时分别为25.26%和31.51%，在4周时分别为46.78%和38%，在8周时分别为47.88%和56.81%。皮质区的平均BIC值在2周时分别为38.86%和58.42%，4周时分别为66.82%和57.74%，8周时分别为79.91%和78.97%。在任何时间点，两种氧化锆材料的平均BIC值均无显著差异。NanoZr种植体具有生物相容性，能够建立紧密的BIC，并且可能是无金属牙科种植体的首选。
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical and histological behavior of a ceria-stabilized zirconia–alumina nanocomposite (NanoZr) in comparison with that of 3 mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline (3Y-TZP) in Sprague Dawley rats. Cylindrical NanoZr and 3Y-TZP implants (diameter 1 mm, length 2 mm) were used. Implant-surface morphology and surface roughness were determined by scanning white-light interferometry and scanning electron microscopy, respectively. The cylindrical zirconia implants were placed at the distal edge of the femur of Sprague Dawley rats. At weeks 2, 4, and 8, the interfacial shear strength between implant and bone was measured by push-in test. Histological analysis was performed using hard-tissue sections. Bone–implant contact (BIC), the thickness of new bone around the implant within the bone marrow area, and osteoclast numbers were evaluated. The average surface roughness of 3Y-TZP (Sa 0.788 μm) was significantly higher than that of NanoZr (Sa 0.559 μm). The shear strengths of 3Y-TZP and NanoZr were similar at 2 weeks, but at 4 and 8 weeks the shear strength of NanoZr was higher than that of 3Y-TZP. The average BIC values within the bone marrow area for 3Y-TZP and NanoZr were 25.26% and 31.51% at 2 weeks, 46.78% and 38% at 4 weeks, and 47.88% and 56.81% at 8 weeks, respectively. The average BIC values within the cortical area were 38.86% and 58.42% at 2 weeks, 66.82% and 57.74% at 4 weeks, and 79.91% and 78.97% at 8 weeks, respectively. The mean BIC value did not differ significantly between the two zirconia materials at any time point. The NanoZr implants were biocompatible, capable of establishing close BIC, and may be preferred for metal-free dental implants.