The influence of magnet on tissue healing after immediate implantation in fresh extraction sites in dogs.
10.4047/jkap.2009.47.4.435
- Author:
Seok Min YU
1
;
In Ho CHO
;
Soo Yeon SHIN
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Korea. cho8511@dku.edu
- Publication Type:Controlled Clinical Trial ; Original Article ; Clinical Trial
- Keywords:
Immediate placement;
Magnet;
Bone remodeling
- MeSH:
Animals;
Bicuspid;
Bone Remodeling;
Bone Resorption;
Dentistry;
Dogs;
Fracture Healing;
Magnets;
Mandible;
Osteogenesis
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2009;47(4):435-444
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The clinical use of electric and electomagnetic fields for fracture healing applications began in the early 1970s. Since then, several technologies have been developed and shown to promote healing of fractures. Developments of these devices have been aided in recent years by basic research and several well controlled clinical trials not only in the medical field but in dentistry. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare alveolar bone reduction following immediate implantation using implants onto which magnets were attached in fresh extracted sockets. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four mongrel dogs were involved. Full buccal and lingual mucoperiosteal flaps were elevated and third and fourth premolars of the mandible were removed. Implants with magnets and implants without magnets were installed in the fresh extracted sockets and after 3 months of healing the animals were sacrificed. The mandibles were dissected and each implant sites were sampled and processed for histological examination. RESULTS: The marginal gaps that were present between the implant and walls of the sockets at the implantation stage disappeared in both groups as a result of bone fill and resorption of the bone crest. The buccal bone crests were located apical of its lingual counterparts. At the 12 week interval the mean of marginal bone resorption in the control group was significantly higher than that of the magnet group. The majority of specimens in magnet group presented early bone formation and less resorption of the buccal marginal bone compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it could be concluded that implants with magnets attached in the early stages of implantation may provide more favorable conditions for early bone formation and reduce resorption and remodeling of marginal bone.
