Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature
Identifieur interne : 005104 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 005103; suivant : 005105Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature
Auteurs : S. Szmukler-Moncler ; H. Salama ; Y. Reingewirtz ; J. H. DubruilleSource :
- Journal of Biomedical Materials Research [ 0021-9304 ] ; 1998-06.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adjacent teeth, Akagawa, Alumina, Anchorage, Animal studies, Apical part, Apposition, Biomechanical factors, Biomed, Bone apposition, Bone fracture healing, Bone ingrowth, Bone level, Bone reactions, Bone response, Bony ingrowth, Branemark, Brous, Brous encapsulation, Brous interposition, Brous tissue, Brous tissue interposition, Brunski, Clin, Conical, Critical threshold, Deleterious, Deleterious micromotion, Dent, Dental implantology, Dental implants, Deporter, Direct bone apposition, Distinct magnitude, Early loading, Element bridge, Encapsulation, Endodontic, Endodontic implants, Excessive micromotion, Experimental literature, Fracture, Fracture healing, Freestanding, Gingival level, Hard diet, Hard diet food, Hard food, Hashimoto, Healing, Healing period, Healing periods, Healing phase, Histologic, Histological, Histological evaluation, Immediate loading, Implant, Implant design, Implant healing, Implant interface, Ingrowth, Interface, Interposition, Jbma, Jbma loading time, Koth, Loading, Loading mode, Loading period, Loading protocol, Loading protocols, Loading time, Mandible, Mckinney, Mechanical environment, Mechanical stimulation, Micromotion, Micromotion effect, Micromotion threshold, Micromovements, Mineralized, Nonloaded, Nonsubmerged, Nonsubmerged implants, Occlusal, Oral cavity, Oral implant, Orthop, Osseointegrated, Osseointegration, Partial loading mode, Pilliar, Pilot study, Porous implants, Porous surface, Primary stability, Prosthesis, Prosthetic, Prosthetic reconstruction, Sagara, Screw implants, Soft diet, Splinting, Surface state, Surg, Tissue differentiation, Tissue ingrowth, Tissue repair, Titanium, Titanium implants, Vivo studies.
- Teeft :
- Adjacent teeth, Akagawa, Alumina, Anchorage, Animal studies, Apical part, Apposition, Biomechanical factors, Biomed, Bone apposition, Bone fracture healing, Bone ingrowth, Bone level, Bone reactions, Bone response, Bony ingrowth, Branemark, Brous, Brous encapsulation, Brous interposition, Brous tissue, Brous tissue interposition, Brunski, Clin, Conical, Critical threshold, Deleterious, Deleterious micromotion, Dent, Dental implantology, Dental implants, Deporter, Direct bone apposition, Distinct magnitude, Early loading, Element bridge, Encapsulation, Endodontic, Endodontic implants, Excessive micromotion, Experimental literature, Fracture, Fracture healing, Freestanding, Gingival level, Hard diet, Hard diet food, Hard food, Hashimoto, Healing, Healing period, Healing periods, Healing phase, Histologic, Histological, Histological evaluation, Immediate loading, Implant, Implant design, Implant healing, Implant interface, Ingrowth, Interface, Interposition, Jbma, Jbma loading time, Koth, Loading, Loading mode, Loading period, Loading protocol, Loading protocols, Loading time, Mandible, Mckinney, Mechanical environment, Mechanical stimulation, Micromotion, Micromotion effect, Micromotion threshold, Micromovements, Mineralized, Nonloaded, Nonsubmerged, Nonsubmerged implants, Occlusal, Oral cavity, Oral implant, Orthop, Osseointegrated, Osseointegration, Partial loading mode, Pilliar, Pilot study, Porous implants, Porous surface, Primary stability, Prosthesis, Prosthetic, Prosthetic reconstruction, Sagara, Screw implants, Soft diet, Splinting, Surface state, Surg, Tissue differentiation, Tissue ingrowth, Tissue repair, Titanium, Titanium implants, Vivo studies.
Abstract
A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. In vivo histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998
Url:
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title><author><name sortKey="Szmukler Oncler, S" sort="Szmukler Oncler, S" uniqKey="Szmukler Oncler S" first="S." last="Szmukler-Moncler">S. Szmukler-Moncler</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Correspondence address: Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Salama, H" sort="Salama, H" uniqKey="Salama H" first="H." last="Salama">H. Salama</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Reingewirtz, Y" sort="Reingewirtz, Y" uniqKey="Reingewirtz Y" first="Y." last="Reingewirtz">Y. Reingewirtz</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dubruille, J H" sort="Dubruille, J H" uniqKey="Dubruille J" first="J. H." last="Dubruille">J. H. Dubruille</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157</idno><date when="1998" year="1998">1998</date><idno type="doi">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">005104</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">005104</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title><author><name sortKey="Szmukler Oncler, S" sort="Szmukler Oncler, S" uniqKey="Szmukler Oncler S" first="S." last="Szmukler-Moncler">S. Szmukler-Moncler</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Correspondence address: Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Salama, H" sort="Salama, H" uniqKey="Salama H" first="H." last="Salama">H. Salama</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Reingewirtz, Y" sort="Reingewirtz, Y" uniqKey="Reingewirtz Y" first="Y." last="Reingewirtz">Y. Reingewirtz</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dubruille, J H" sort="Dubruille, J H" uniqKey="Dubruille J" first="J. H." last="Dubruille">J. H. Dubruille</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH</title><idno type="ISSN">0021-9304</idno><idno type="eISSN">1097-4636</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">43</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="192">192</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="203">203</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">12</biblScope><publisher>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1998-06">1998-06</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0021-9304</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0021-9304</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adjacent teeth</term><term>Akagawa</term><term>Alumina</term><term>Anchorage</term><term>Animal studies</term><term>Apical part</term><term>Apposition</term><term>Biomechanical factors</term><term>Biomed</term><term>Bone apposition</term><term>Bone fracture healing</term><term>Bone ingrowth</term><term>Bone level</term><term>Bone reactions</term><term>Bone response</term><term>Bony ingrowth</term><term>Branemark</term><term>Brous</term><term>Brous encapsulation</term><term>Brous interposition</term><term>Brous tissue</term><term>Brous tissue interposition</term><term>Brunski</term><term>Clin</term><term>Conical</term><term>Critical threshold</term><term>Deleterious</term><term>Deleterious micromotion</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implantology</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Deporter</term><term>Direct bone apposition</term><term>Distinct magnitude</term><term>Early loading</term><term>Element bridge</term><term>Encapsulation</term><term>Endodontic</term><term>Endodontic implants</term><term>Excessive micromotion</term><term>Experimental literature</term><term>Fracture</term><term>Fracture healing</term><term>Freestanding</term><term>Gingival level</term><term>Hard diet</term><term>Hard diet food</term><term>Hard food</term><term>Hashimoto</term><term>Healing</term><term>Healing period</term><term>Healing periods</term><term>Healing phase</term><term>Histologic</term><term>Histological</term><term>Histological evaluation</term><term>Immediate loading</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant design</term><term>Implant healing</term><term>Implant interface</term><term>Ingrowth</term><term>Interface</term><term>Interposition</term><term>Jbma</term><term>Jbma loading time</term><term>Koth</term><term>Loading</term><term>Loading mode</term><term>Loading period</term><term>Loading protocol</term><term>Loading protocols</term><term>Loading time</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mckinney</term><term>Mechanical environment</term><term>Mechanical stimulation</term><term>Micromotion</term><term>Micromotion effect</term><term>Micromotion threshold</term><term>Micromovements</term><term>Mineralized</term><term>Nonloaded</term><term>Nonsubmerged</term><term>Nonsubmerged implants</term><term>Occlusal</term><term>Oral cavity</term><term>Oral implant</term><term>Orthop</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Partial loading mode</term><term>Pilliar</term><term>Pilot study</term><term>Porous implants</term><term>Porous surface</term><term>Primary stability</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic reconstruction</term><term>Sagara</term><term>Screw implants</term><term>Soft diet</term><term>Splinting</term><term>Surface state</term><term>Surg</term><term>Tissue differentiation</term><term>Tissue ingrowth</term><term>Tissue repair</term><term>Titanium</term><term>Titanium implants</term><term>Vivo studies</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Adjacent teeth</term><term>Akagawa</term><term>Alumina</term><term>Anchorage</term><term>Animal studies</term><term>Apical part</term><term>Apposition</term><term>Biomechanical factors</term><term>Biomed</term><term>Bone apposition</term><term>Bone fracture healing</term><term>Bone ingrowth</term><term>Bone level</term><term>Bone reactions</term><term>Bone response</term><term>Bony ingrowth</term><term>Branemark</term><term>Brous</term><term>Brous encapsulation</term><term>Brous interposition</term><term>Brous tissue</term><term>Brous tissue interposition</term><term>Brunski</term><term>Clin</term><term>Conical</term><term>Critical threshold</term><term>Deleterious</term><term>Deleterious micromotion</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implantology</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Deporter</term><term>Direct bone apposition</term><term>Distinct magnitude</term><term>Early loading</term><term>Element bridge</term><term>Encapsulation</term><term>Endodontic</term><term>Endodontic implants</term><term>Excessive micromotion</term><term>Experimental literature</term><term>Fracture</term><term>Fracture healing</term><term>Freestanding</term><term>Gingival level</term><term>Hard diet</term><term>Hard diet food</term><term>Hard food</term><term>Hashimoto</term><term>Healing</term><term>Healing period</term><term>Healing periods</term><term>Healing phase</term><term>Histologic</term><term>Histological</term><term>Histological evaluation</term><term>Immediate loading</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant design</term><term>Implant healing</term><term>Implant interface</term><term>Ingrowth</term><term>Interface</term><term>Interposition</term><term>Jbma</term><term>Jbma loading time</term><term>Koth</term><term>Loading</term><term>Loading mode</term><term>Loading period</term><term>Loading protocol</term><term>Loading protocols</term><term>Loading time</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mckinney</term><term>Mechanical environment</term><term>Mechanical stimulation</term><term>Micromotion</term><term>Micromotion effect</term><term>Micromotion threshold</term><term>Micromovements</term><term>Mineralized</term><term>Nonloaded</term><term>Nonsubmerged</term><term>Nonsubmerged implants</term><term>Occlusal</term><term>Oral cavity</term><term>Oral implant</term><term>Orthop</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Partial loading mode</term><term>Pilliar</term><term>Pilot study</term><term>Porous implants</term><term>Porous surface</term><term>Primary stability</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic reconstruction</term><term>Sagara</term><term>Screw implants</term><term>Soft diet</term><term>Splinting</term><term>Surface state</term><term>Surg</term><term>Tissue differentiation</term><term>Tissue ingrowth</term><term>Tissue repair</term><term>Titanium</term><term>Titanium implants</term><term>Vivo studies</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. In vivo histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>brous</json:string><json:string>micromotion</json:string><json:string>osseointegration</json:string><json:string>ingrowth</json:string><json:string>early loading</json:string><json:string>prosthetic</json:string><json:string>encapsulation</json:string><json:string>micromovements</json:string><json:string>bone ingrowth</json:string><json:string>pilliar</json:string><json:string>deporter</json:string><json:string>osseointegrated</json:string><json:string>branemark</json:string><json:string>akagawa</json:string><json:string>mandible</json:string><json:string>histological</json:string><json:string>apposition</json:string><json:string>freestanding</json:string><json:string>dental implants</json:string><json:string>surg</json:string><json:string>jbma</json:string><json:string>occlusal</json:string><json:string>brous tissue interposition</json:string><json:string>brunski</json:string><json:string>alumina</json:string><json:string>prosthetic reconstruction</json:string><json:string>clin</json:string><json:string>nonsubmerged</json:string><json:string>healing period</json:string><json:string>sagara</json:string><json:string>histologic</json:string><json:string>brous encapsulation</json:string><json:string>endodontic</json:string><json:string>nonloaded</json:string><json:string>direct bone apposition</json:string><json:string>conical</json:string><json:string>biomed</json:string><json:string>prosthesis</json:string><json:string>orthop</json:string><json:string>deleterious</json:string><json:string>brous tissue</json:string><json:string>hashimoto</json:string><json:string>element bridge</json:string><json:string>implant design</json:string><json:string>koth</json:string><json:string>hard diet</json:string><json:string>loading mode</json:string><json:string>micromotion effect</json:string><json:string>interface</json:string><json:string>mineralized</json:string><json:string>loading</json:string><json:string>fracture</json:string><json:string>splinting</json:string><json:string>titanium implants</json:string><json:string>brous interposition</json:string><json:string>immediate loading</json:string><json:string>experimental literature</json:string><json:string>vivo studies</json:string><json:string>bone apposition</json:string><json:string>hard diet food</json:string><json:string>primary stability</json:string><json:string>pilot study</json:string><json:string>surface state</json:string><json:string>titanium</json:string><json:string>healing</json:string><json:string>interposition</json:string><json:string>soft diet</json:string><json:string>tissue differentiation</json:string><json:string>oral cavity</json:string><json:string>porous surface</json:string><json:string>screw implants</json:string><json:string>endodontic implants</json:string><json:string>bony ingrowth</json:string><json:string>animal studies</json:string><json:string>deleterious micromotion</json:string><json:string>histological evaluation</json:string><json:string>loading time</json:string><json:string>bone level</json:string><json:string>micromotion threshold</json:string><json:string>partial loading mode</json:string><json:string>gingival level</json:string><json:string>healing phase</json:string><json:string>fracture healing</json:string><json:string>mechanical stimulation</json:string><json:string>critical threshold</json:string><json:string>loading period</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>mckinney</json:string><json:string>anchorage</json:string><json:string>loading protocol</json:string><json:string>porous implants</json:string><json:string>distinct magnitude</json:string><json:string>implant interface</json:string><json:string>loading protocols</json:string><json:string>hard food</json:string><json:string>tissue repair</json:string><json:string>bone response</json:string><json:string>jbma loading time</json:string><json:string>dental implantology</json:string><json:string>implant healing</json:string><json:string>bone reactions</json:string><json:string>bone fracture healing</json:string><json:string>tissue ingrowth</json:string><json:string>mechanical environment</json:string><json:string>healing periods</json:string><json:string>adjacent teeth</json:string><json:string>nonsubmerged implants</json:string><json:string>excessive micromotion</json:string><json:string>biomechanical factors</json:string><json:string>oral implant</json:string><json:string>apical part</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>S. Szmukler‐Moncler</name><affiliations><json:string>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</json:string><json:string>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</json:string><json:string>Correspondence address: Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>H. Salama</name><affiliations><json:string>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Reingewirtz</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>J. H. Dubruille</name><affiliations><json:string>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>early loading</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>dental implants</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>in vivo</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>micromotion</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>osseointegration</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>JBM14</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-F3FQ0846-X</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. In vivo histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998</abstract><qualityIndicators><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>208</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1445</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>5</keywordCount><score>9.496</score><pdfWordCount>7971</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>52572</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>12</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>612 x 792 pts (letter)</pdfPageSize></qualityIndicators><title>Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4636</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>0021-9304</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1097-4636</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>JBM</json:string></publisherId><volume>43</volume><issue>2</issue><pages><first>192</first><last>203</last><total>12</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1979</json:string><json:string>1975</json:string><json:string>1993</json:string><json:string>1969</json:string><json:string>1998</json:string><json:string>05-13-98</json:string><json:string>1970s</json:string><json:string>1977</json:string><json:string>1973</json:string><json:string>1991</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>Sons, Inc.</json:string><json:string>Sons, Inc</json:string><json:string>University of Paris</json:string><json:string>Implant Center</json:string><json:string>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France Received</json:string><json:string>University of Pennsylvania</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Branemark</json:string><json:string>John Wiley</json:string><json:string>Localization</json:string><json:string>The</json:string><json:string>Y. Reingewirtz</json:string><json:string>H. Dubruille</json:string><json:string>S. Szmukler</json:string><json:string>H. Salama</json:string><json:string>Time Animal</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Paris</json:string><json:string>Implant Post Length Bridge</json:string><json:string>Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge</json:string><json:string>France</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Akagawa et al.</json:string><json:string>Linkow et al.</json:string><json:string>Natiella et al.</json:string><json:string>Schatzker et al.</json:string><json:string>Lum et al.</json:string><json:string>Salama et al.</json:string><json:string>Al-Sayed et al.</json:string><json:string>Piatelli et al.</json:string><json:string>Deporter et al.</json:string><json:string>Rostlund et al.</json:string><json:string>Maniatopoulos et al.</json:string><json:string>Pilliero et al.</json:string><json:string>Sagara et al.</json:string><json:string>Hashimoto et al.</json:string><json:string>Branemark et al.</json:string><json:string>Anderson et al.</json:string><json:string>Pilliar et al.</json:string><json:string>Hulbert et al.</json:string><json:string>Sisk et al.</json:string><json:string>Moncler et al.</json:string><json:string>Brunski et al.</json:string><json:string>Godfredsen et al.</json:string><json:string>Piattelli et al.</json:string><json:string>Sarmiento et al.</json:string><json:string>Kenwright et al.</json:string><json:string>Al-Sayyed et al.</json:string><json:string>Cameron et al.</json:string><json:string>Corigliano et al.</json:string><json:string>Ducheyne et al.</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-F3FQ0846-X</json:string></ark><categories><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string><json:string>4 - chirurgie (generalites). transplantations, greffes d'organes et de tissus. pathologie des greffons</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1998</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1998</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2>192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K</json:string></doi><id>A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><availability><licence>Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</licence></availability><date type="published" when="1998-06"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title><title level="a" type="short" xml:lang="en">Loading time and micromotion effect on osseointegration review</title><author xml:id="author-0000" role="corresp"><persName><forename type="first">S.</forename><surname>Szmukler‐Moncler</surname></persName><affiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland<address><country key="CH"></country></address></affiliation><affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France<address><country key="FR"></country></address></affiliation><affiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">H.</forename><surname>Salama</surname></persName><affiliation>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<address><country key="US"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Y.</forename><surname>Reingewirtz</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France<address><country key="FR"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">J. H.</forename><surname>Dubruille</surname></persName><affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France<address><country key="FR"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-F3FQ0846-X</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K</idno><idno type="unit">JBM14</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:JBM.JBM14.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH</title><idno type="pISSN">0021-9304</idno><idno type="eISSN">1097-4636</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4636</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<>1.0.CO;2-R</idno><idno type="product">JBM</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">43</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="192">192</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="203">203</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">12</biblScope><publisher>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1998-06"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><head>Abstract</head><p>A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. <hi rend="italic">In vivo</hi> histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="kwd1">early loading</term><term xml:id="kwd2">dental implants</term><term xml:id="kwd3"><hi rend="italic">in vivo</hi></term><term xml:id="kwd4">micromotion</term><term xml:id="kwd5">osseointegration</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</publisherName><publisherLoc>New York</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi registered="yes">10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4636</doi><issn type="print">0021-9304</issn><issn type="electronic">1097-4636</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="JBM"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en" sort="JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH">Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title><title type="short">J. Biomed. Mater. Res.</title></titleGroup><selfCitationGroup><citation type="ancestor" xml:id="cit1"><journalTitle>Journal of Applied Biomaterials</journalTitle><accessionId ref="info:x-wiley/issn/10454861">1045-4861</accessionId><pubYear year="1995">1995</pubYear><vol>6</vol><issue>4</issue></citation></selfCitationGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="20"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<>1.0.CO;2-R</doi><idGroup><id type="focusSection" value="0"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="focusSection" xml:lang="en">Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title></titleGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="43">43</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue">2</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="1998-06">Summer 1998</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="14" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="JBM14"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="12"></count></countGroup><copyright ownership="publisher">Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</copyright><eventGroup><event type="manuscriptReceived" date="1996-10-24"></event><event type="manuscriptRevised" date="1997-06-17"></event><event type="manuscriptAccepted" date="1997-06-18"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="1998-12-06"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2002-07-31"></event><event type="publishedOnlineAcceptedOrEarlyUnpaginated" date="1998-12-06"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:JWSART34_TO_WML3G version:2.3.25 mode:FullText source:HeaderRef result:HeaderRef" date="2010-11-10"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-28"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-24"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst">192</numbering><numbering type="pageLast">203</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:JBM.JBM14.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="4"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="75"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="6381"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en">Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title><title type="short" xml:lang="en">Loading time and micromotion effect on osseointegration review</title></titleGroup><creators><creator xml:id="au1" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1 #af2" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>S.</givenNames><familyName>Szmukler‐Moncler</familyName></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au2" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af3"><personName><givenNames>H.</givenNames><familyName>Salama</familyName></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au3" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af4"><personName><givenNames>Y.</givenNames><familyName>Reingewirtz</familyName></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au4" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af2"><personName><givenNames>J. H.</givenNames><familyName>Dubruille</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="af1" countryCode="CH" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="af2" countryCode="FR" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="af3" countryCode="US" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="af4" countryCode="FR" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en" type="author"><keyword xml:id="kwd1">early loading</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd2">dental implants</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd3"><i>in vivo</i></keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd4">micromotion</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd5">osseointegration</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. <i>In vivo</i> histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Loading time and micromotion effect on osseointegration review</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">S.</namePart><namePart type="family">Szmukler‐Moncler</namePart><affiliation>Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</affiliation><affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</affiliation><affiliation>Correspondence address: Institut Straumann, Waldenburg, Switzerland</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">H.</namePart><namePart type="family">Salama</namePart><affiliation>Implant Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Y.</namePart><namePart type="family">Reingewirtz</namePart><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">J. H.</namePart><namePart type="family">Dubruille</namePart><affiliation>Institute of Stomatology, Plastic Surgery and Maxillo‐facial Surgery, University of Paris VI, Paris, France</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">New York</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1998-06</dateIssued><dateCaptured encoding="w3cdtf">1996-10-24</dateCaptured><dateValid encoding="w3cdtf">1997-06-18</dateValid><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1998</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="figures">0</extent><extent unit="tables">4</extent><extent unit="references">75</extent><extent unit="words">6381</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">A significant no‐load healing period is the generally accepted prerequisite for osseointegration in dental implantology. The aim of this article was to examine whether this no‐load healing period is validated by the experimental literature. In vivo histological data was scrutinized to identify the effect of early loading protocols on the bone‐implant interface. Several loading modes were identified. They were categorized into groups according to implant design and the type of prosthetic reconstruction, and by their ability to introduce a distinct magnitude of motion at the interface. Specific histologic responses of early loaded implants (i.e., fibrous repair or osseointegration) were suggested to be directly related to the specific combinations of the above parameters. Early loading per se was not found to be detrimental to osseointegration. Specifically, only excessive micromotion was directly implicated in the formation of fibrous encapsulation. The literature suggests that there is a critical threshold of micromotion above which fibrous encapsulation prevails over osseointegration. This critical level, however, was not zero micromotion as generally interpreted. Instead, the tolerated micromotion threshold was found to lie somewhere between 50 and 150 μm. Suggestions are made for the earliest loading time that achieves osseointegration. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 43: 192–203, 1998</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>early loading</topic><topic>dental implants</topic><topic>in vivo</topic><topic>micromotion</topic><topic>osseointegration</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Biomedical Materials Research</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>J. Biomed. Mater. Res.</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0021-9304</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1097-4636</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4636</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">JBM</identifier><part><date>1998</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>43</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>192</start><end>203</end><total>12</total></extent></part></relatedItem><relatedItem type="preceding"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Applied Biomaterials</title></titleInfo><identifier type="ISSN">1045-4861</identifier><part><date point="end">1995</date><detail type="volume"><caption>last vol.</caption><number>6</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>last no.</caption><number>4</number></detail></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-F3FQ0846-X</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">JBM14</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 005104 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 005104 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:A1EE968B495E76377E3F6E43CFC9B966CEC6F157
|texte= Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone–dental implant interface: Review of experimental literature
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |