IADR Abstract Archives
Gingival Blood Flow at Teeth Versus Dental Implants
Objectives: The anatomical structure of the surrounding tissues of dental implants differ from the surrounding tissues of natural teeth. According to the previous studies blood flow is lower in peri-implant soft tissues. However, it is not known whether this reduced resting blood flow could influence vasodilatation capacity of the gingiva.
The aim of the present study was to compare the vasodilatation capacity of the gingiva at implants to the teeth.
Methods: Fourteen healthy volunteers with single-tooth implants were involved in our study. The vasodilation capacity was assessed by post-occlusive reactive hyperaemia test developed by our group previously. After baseline measurement standardised 100 g pressure was applied for 5 seconds on the attached gingiva with an angulated instrument, especially developed for this purpose. After the compression, blood flow was monitored continuously for 20 minutes by Laser Speckle Contrast Imager at the whole surrounding attached gingiva of the implant borne crown or natural teeth.
Results: No significant difference was found in baseline blood flow in either regions between teeth and implants (apical: 244±19 vs 268±17, central: 237±15 vs 269±16, coronal: 229±13 vs 260±14 LSPU). Occlusion induced ischemia and subsequently hyperaemia in all regions with similar extent at implants and at teeth (peaks of hyperaemia: apical: 113±19 vs 130±21, central: 102±19 vs 101±18, coronal: 63±12 vs 62±13 LSPU).
Conclusions: According to our preliminary results there is no difference in resting blood flow around teeth or implants and vasodilatation capacity is not reduced in peri-implant soft tissues. Further investigation is necessary to reveal the effect of gender, abutment material, age, blood pressure on vasodilatory capacity.
Supported by Hungarian OTKA K112364 and KFI_16-1-2017-0409.
The aim of the present study was to compare the vasodilatation capacity of the gingiva at implants to the teeth.
Methods: Fourteen healthy volunteers with single-tooth implants were involved in our study. The vasodilation capacity was assessed by post-occlusive reactive hyperaemia test developed by our group previously. After baseline measurement standardised 100 g pressure was applied for 5 seconds on the attached gingiva with an angulated instrument, especially developed for this purpose. After the compression, blood flow was monitored continuously for 20 minutes by Laser Speckle Contrast Imager at the whole surrounding attached gingiva of the implant borne crown or natural teeth.
Results: No significant difference was found in baseline blood flow in either regions between teeth and implants (apical: 244±19 vs 268±17, central: 237±15 vs 269±16, coronal: 229±13 vs 260±14 LSPU). Occlusion induced ischemia and subsequently hyperaemia in all regions with similar extent at implants and at teeth (peaks of hyperaemia: apical: 113±19 vs 130±21, central: 102±19 vs 101±18, coronal: 63±12 vs 62±13 LSPU).
Conclusions: According to our preliminary results there is no difference in resting blood flow around teeth or implants and vasodilatation capacity is not reduced in peri-implant soft tissues. Further investigation is necessary to reveal the effect of gender, abutment material, age, blood pressure on vasodilatory capacity.
Supported by Hungarian OTKA K112364 and KFI_16-1-2017-0409.