MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sandblasted and cleansed planar titanium specimens with a size of 5 × 5 × 1 mm were coated on one side with 0.25 vol% eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). The other side of the specimens was kept highly polished (the control side). These specimens were inserted in rabbit mandibles. Twelve rabbits were randomly assigned into three study groups (n = 4). The rabbits were sacrificed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. The harvested specimens with the implants were assessed for new bone formation on both sides of the implant using CBCT, conventional radiographs, and the biaxial pullout test. The results were statistically analyzed by a nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test and Friedman's test as multiple comparisons and by Brunner-Langer nonparametric mixed model approach (R Software).
RESULTS: A significant osteoconductive bone formation was found on the EPA-coated Ti implant surface (P < 0.05) at 8 weeks when compared to the polished surface (control). Biaxial pullout test results showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) after 8 and 12 weeks with a maximum force of 243.8 N, compared to 143.25 N after 4 week.
CONCLUSION: EPA implant coating promoted osteoconduction on the Ti implant surfaces, enhancing the anchorage of the implant to the surrounding bone in white New Zealand rabbits.
METHODS: Fifty digital models were scanned from the same plaster models. Arch and tooth size measurements were made by 2 operators, twice. Calibration was done on 10 sets of models and checked using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Data were analyzed by error variances, repeatability coefficient, repeated-measures analysis of variance, and Bland-Altman plots.
RESULTS: Error variances ranged between 0.001 and 0.044 mm for the digital caliper method, and between 0.002 and 0.054 mm for the 3D software method. Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed small but statistically significant differences (P <0.05) between the repeated measurements in the arch and buccolingual planes (0.011 and 0.008 mm, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between methods and between operators. Bland-Altman plots showed that the mean biases were close to zero, and the 95% limits of agreement were within ±0.50 mm. Repeatability coefficients for all measurements were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: Measurements made on models scanned by the 3D structured-light scanner were in good agreement with those made on conventional plaster models and were, therefore, clinically acceptable.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 18 patients were rehabilitated with maxillary CD opposing mandibular IRO, and 4 patients were prescribed with conventional CD. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of the maxilla were acquired before and 1 year post-treatment and converted into 3D models using Mimics research software. RRR was quantified by measuring the changes in bone volume following superimpositioning and sectioning of these models at the anterior maxillary region. Subsequently, the sectioned 3D models of the anterior maxilla were exported to 3-Matic software to reveal the predominant region and depth of RRR.
RESULTS: The mean reduction in bone volume of the anterior maxilla in the CD group was 2.60% (SD = 1.71%, range = -4.89 % to -0.92%, median = -2.30%), while the mean reduction in the IRO group was almost three times higher at 7.25% (SD = 3.16%, range = -13.25 to -1.50, median = -7.15%). The predominant areas of RRR were on the buccal and occlusal ridge of the anterior maxilla.
CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this study, it may be concluded that an IRO caused significantly higher RRR of the anterior maxilla than a CD.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the safe distance in the interforaminal region of the mandible measured from the genial tubercle level for implant osteotomy in a Chinese-Malaysian population.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 201 Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) files were selected for the study from the CBCTs of dentate or edentulous Chinese-Malaysian adult patients with ongoing or completed treatments. Measurements were made with implant planning software. The anatomy of the whole mandible was assessed in the coronal cross-sectional, horizontal view and in panoramic view. Measurements were obtained in millimeters on one side by locating and marking a genial tubercle and then marking the mesial margin of the mental foramen and the anterior loop of the inferior alveolar nerve. The corresponding points of these landmarks were identified on the crest of the mandibular ridge to measure the linear distances. All the measurement steps were repeated on the other side. The linear distance of 2 mm was deducted from the total distance between the genial tubercle and the anterior loop separately for left and right side measurements to identify the safe zone. The mixed 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to analyze side and sex-related variations.
RESULTS: The mean safe zone measured at the crestal level from the genial tubercle site on the left side of the mandible was 21.12 mm and 21.67 mm on the right side. A statistically significant (P