Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Effect of a Keratin Hydrogel Coating on Osseointegration: An Histological Comparison of Coated and Non-coated Dental Titanium Implants in an Ovine Model

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bioactive substances may be used to enhance the rate and quantity of bone healing during osseointegration of titanium dental implants. A pilot observational study was undertaken to assess a novel keratin hydrogel in six adult sheep utilising the femoral condyles as the surgical site to assess osseointegration. Implants and osteotomy sites were coated with the keratin gel prior to implant placement (test implants) whereas the opposite knee received unmodified control implants in each animal. Fifty 3.5 mm × 7 mm Neoss dental implants were surgically implanted with a range of 3–5 Neoss dental implants placed per surgical site in each knee and allowed to heal for 5 days or 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks prior to the sheep being sacrificed. Of the 50 placed implants, 24 were used for this study and analysed via resin-embedded, undemineralised sections from test and control implants to assess the range of healing around the unloaded dental implants. These dental implants were analysed using histomorphometric methods for the best 3 consecutive threads on each side and the percentage of bone to implant contact (%BIC) was used to determine the degree of osseointegration between test and control dental implants at each time point. All implants appeared osseointegrated at the time of sacrifice. One each of the pairs of control implants at 2, 4 and 12 weeks demonstrated minimal integration histologically, with %BIC <10 %. No test implants had %BIC <35 % at any time point. Mean %BIC for test implants was higher than controls at all time points except 5 days and 2 weeks. The range from 2 to 16 weeks healing was 39.7 % [SD 25.5 %] to 85.4 % [14.2 %] for test implants and 35.6 % [43.4 %] to 46.6 % [23.1 %] for controls. %BIC appeared to increase earlier in the test implants (from 4 weeks onwards) compared to controls. After 16 weeks, %BIC was almost twice as great in test implants as controls. This pilot observational study suggests that keratin hydrogel may promote earlier osseointegration around titanium dental implants. Further cross-sectional studies with larger sample sizes are warranted. The most marked difference between test and control implants was seen after 4 weeks. It is recommended that future studies in this model focus on healing after 4 weeks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Le Gu’ehennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y (2007) Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 23:844–854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wikesjo UM et al (2008) Bone formation at recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2-coated titanium implants in the posterior maxilla (Type IV bone) in non-human primates. J Clin Periodontol 35:992–1000

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ioannidou E (2006) Therapeutic modulation of growth factors and cytokines in regenerative medicine. Curr Pharm Des 12:2397–2408

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Verge VM, Gratto KA, Karchewski LA, Richardson PM (1996) Neurotrophins and nerve injury in the adult. Philos Trans R Soc London B Biol Sci 351:423–430

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Frostick SP, Yin Q, Kemp GJ (1998) Schwann cells, neurotrophic factors and peripheral nerve regeneration. Microsurgery 18:397–405

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sierpinski P, Garrett J, Ma J, Apel P, Klorig D, Smith T et al (2008) The use of keratin biomaterials derived from human hair for the promotion of rapid regeneration of peripheral nerves. Biomaterials 29:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Peplow PV, Dias GJ (2004) A study of the relationship between mass and physical strength of keratin bars in vivo. J Mater Sci Mater Med 15:1217–1220

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dias GJ, Peplow PV, MvLauglin A, Teixeira F, Kelly RJ (2010) Biocompatability and osseointegration of reconstituted keratin in an ovine model. J Biomed Mater Res A 92:513–520

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Freepatentsonline. Orthopaedic materials derived from keratin. United States Patent 7297342[Nov 20 2007]. Accessed at: HYPERLINK “http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7337960.htmlwww.freepatentsonline.com/7297342.html on 13 Sept 2009

  10. Duncan WJ, Lee M, Dovban AS, Ershadi S, Hendra N, Ruende H (2008) Anodisation increases early integration of Osstem implants in sheep femurs. Ann R Australas College Dent Surg 19:152–156

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pearce AI, Richards RG, Milz S, Schneider E, Pearce SG (2007) Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater 13:1–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lambert P, Morris H, Ochi S (1997) Positive effect of surgical experience with implants on second-stage implant survival. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 55:12–18

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Duyck J, Naert I (1998) Failure of oral implants: aetiology, symptoms and influencing factors. Clin Oral Investig 2:102–114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Melo MD, Shafie H, Obeid G (2006) Implant survival rates for oral and maxillofacial surgery residents: a retrospective clinical review with analysis of resident level of training on implant survival. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 64:1185–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Duncan WJ (2006) Meta-analysis of three implant experiments in the sheep mandibular model. International Association for Dental Research. General Session & Exhibition (June 28–July 1, 2006), Brisbane

  16. Moroni A, Faldini C, Chilo V, Rocca M, Stea S, Giannini S (1999) The effect of surface material and roughness on bone screw stability. J Orthop Trauma 13:477–482

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schopper C, Moser D, Goriwoda W, Ziya-Ghazvini F, Spassova E, Lagogiannis G et al (2005) The effect of three different calcium phosphate implant coatings on bone deposition and coating resorption: a long-term histological study in sheep. Clin Oral Implants Res 16:357–368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duncan I. Campbell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Campbell, D.I., Duncan, W.J. The Effect of a Keratin Hydrogel Coating on Osseointegration: An Histological Comparison of Coated and Non-coated Dental Titanium Implants in an Ovine Model. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 13, 159–164 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-013-0482-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-013-0482-y

Keywords

Navigation