Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Cranio-Ma...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Article . 2001 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Analysis of the osseous/metal interface of drill free screws and self-tapping screws

Authors: W, Heidemann; H, Terheyden; K L, Gerlach;

Analysis of the osseous/metal interface of drill free screws and self-tapping screws

Abstract

Aim: A comparison of metal/osseous interface and bone remodelling after insertion of different types of titanium bone screws in vivo. Material: Samples of five of each of the following bone screw types were inserted into the anterior wall of the frontal sinus of five Göttingen minipigs: self-tapping micro- (1.5 mm) and miniscrews (2.0 mm) or drill free micro- (1.5 mm) and miniscrews (2.0 mm) (Martin Medizintechnik, Tuttlingen, Germany). Screw length was 7 mm. Methods: Sequential intraperitoneal injections of fluorochromes were performed between the second and ninth postoperative week. After 6 months the pigs were sacrificed, the screw-bone-blocks resected, and microradiographic, histological and fluorescence microscopical examinations were carried out. Results: Using drill free screws, mean screw/bone contact was 88.4% (miniscrews), or 93.8% (microscrews). With self-tapping miniscrews it was 54.9%, but in microscrews 81%; the differences were statistically significant (t -test: p<0.05). By fluorescence microscopy, the amount of bone remodelling (ratio of residual vs. newly formed bone) was measured. Significantly more of the residual bone was found in the region of the screw threads using drill free screws (miniscrews: mean 71.8%, microscrews: mean 67.9%) than in the region of screw threads with self-tapping screws (miniscrews: mean 33.1%, microscrews: mean 42.4%). Conclusion: The present data support the view that screw/bone contact with drill free screws was superior to that of self-tapping screws; the greater amount of original bone in the threads of drill free screws demonstrated that the insertion of drill free screws did not cause harm to the surrounding bone. Both results are important for osteosynthesis in regions where thin cortical bone is present, such as the central midface. Copyright 2001 European Association for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery.

Keywords

Titanium, Microsurgery, Surface Properties, Swine, Bone Screws, Statistics as Topic, Equipment Design, Microradiography, Haversian System, Microscopy, Fluorescence, Osseointegration, Frontal Bone, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Animals, Frontal Sinus, Swine, Miniature, Female, Bone Remodeling, Injections, Intraperitoneal, Fluorescent Dyes

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    57
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
57
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!