A Narrative Review of the Histological and Histomorphometrical Evaluation of the Peri-Implant Bone in Loaded and Unloaded Dental Implants. A 30-Year Experience (1988–2018)

Margherita Tumedei, Adriano Piattelli, Marco Degidi, Carlo Mangano and Giovanna Iezzi
Additional contact information
Margherita Tumedei: Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University “G. D’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
Adriano Piattelli: Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University “G. D’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
Marco Degidi: Private Practice, 40121 Bologna, Italy
Carlo Mangano: Private Practice, 22015 Gravedona (Como), Italy
Giovanna Iezzi: Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University “G. D’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 6, 1-18

Abstract: Background : The aim of the present review was to assess the histological and histomorphometrical data from the paper published by our Laboratory on peri-implant bone in dental implants in different loading conditions. Methods : The papers published in different implant loading conditions, in dental implants retrieved from humans, and in the Hard Tissues Research Center of the University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, were screened on MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and other electronic databases until 31 December 2018. Only articles that reported the histological and histomorphometrical values of the Bone-Implant Contact (BIC) were selected. Results : The system selection provided a total of 155 papers. The manuscripts included for the narrative review were 57. These papers provided histological and histomorphometrical data. Conclusions : The bone remodeling around dental implants was found to be a dynamic process; loading changed the microstructure of the peri-implant bone; and implants were found to provide a successful function, over several decades, with different range of degrees of BIC in vivo (varying from a little more than 30% to a little more than 90%). Loaded implants presented a 10%–12% higher BIC values when compared to submerged, unloaded implants, and rougher surfaces had, on average, about a 10% higher BIC than machined surfaces.

Keywords: dental implant; loading; osseointegration; peri-implant bone (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/6/2088/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/6/2088/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:6:p:2088-:d:335345

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().