PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

John B Brunski

Publications and source records attributed to John B Brunski.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Effect of mechanical stimuli on skeletal regeneration around implants.

Due to the aging population and the increasing need for total joint replacements, osseointegration is of a great interest for various clinical disciplines. Our objective was to investigate the molecular and cellular foundation that underlies this process. Here, we used an in vivo mouse model to study the cellular and molecular response in three distinct areas of unloaded implants: the periosteum, the gap between implant and cortical bone, and the marrow space. Our analyses began with the early phases of healing, and continued until the implants were completely osseointegrated. We investigated aspects of osseointegration ranging from vascularization, cell proliferation, differentiation, and bone remodeling. In doing so, we gained an understanding of the healing mechanisms of different skeletal tissues during unloaded implant osseointegration. To continue our analysis, we used a micromotion device to apply a defined physical stimulus to the implants, and in doing so, we dramatically enhanced bone formation in the peri-implant tissue. By comparing strain measurements with cellular and molecular analyses, we developed an understanding of the correlation between strain magnitudes and fate decisions of cells shaping the skeletal regenerate.

Adult Stem Cells↗
PubMed2003

Quality of dental implants.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians need quality research data to decide which dental implant should be selected for patient treatment. AIM(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To present the scientific evidence for claims of relationship between characteristics of dental implants and clinical performance. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic search of promotional material and Internet sites to find claims of implant superiority related to specific characteristics of the implant, and of the dental research literature to find scientific support for the claims. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Critical appraisal of the research documentation to establish the scientific external and internal validity as a basis for the likelihood of reported treatment outcomes as a function of implant characteristics. RESULTS: More than 220 implant brands have been identified, produced by about 80 manufacturers. The implants are made from different materials, undergo different surface treatments and come in different shapes, lengths, widths and forms. The dentist can in theory choose among more than 2,000 implants in a given patient treatment situation. Implants made from titanium and titanium alloys appear to perform well clinically in properly surgically prepared bone, regardless of small variations of shapes and forms. Various surface treatments are currently being developed to improve the capacity of a more rapid anchorage of the implant into bone. A substantial number of claims made by different manufacturers on alleged superiority due to design characteristics are not based on sound and long-term clinical scientific research. Implants are, in some parts of the world, manufactured and sold with no demonstration of adherence to any international standards. CONCLUSIONS: The scientific literature does not provide any clear directives to claims of alleged benefits of specific morphological characteristics of dental implants.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of load distribution for implant overdenture attachments.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the force and moment distributions that develop on different implant overdenture attachments when vertical compressive forces are applied to an implant-retained overdenture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The following attachments were examined: Nobel Biocare bar and clip (NBC), Nobel Biocare standard ball (NSB), Nobel Biocare 2.25-mm-diameter ball (NB2), Zest Anchor Advanced Generation (ZAAG), Sterngold ERA white (SEW), Sterngold ERA orange (SEO), Compliant Keeper System with titanium shims (CK-Ti), Compliant Keeper System with black nitrile 2SR90 sleeve rings (CK-70), and Compliant Keeper System with clear silicone 2SR90 sleeve rings (CK-90). The attachments were tested using custom strain-gauged abutments and 2 Brånemark System implants placed in a test model. Each attachment type had one part embedded in a denture-like housing and the other part (the abutment) screwed into the implants. Compressive static loads of 100 N were applied (1) bilaterally, over the distal midline (DM); (2) unilaterally, over the right implant (RI); (3) unilaterally, over the left implant (LI); and (4) between implants in the mid-anterior region (MA). Both the force and bending moment on each implant were recorded for each loading location and attachment type. Results were analyzed using 2-way analysis of variance and the Duncan multiple-range test. RESULTS: Both loading location and attachment type were statistically significant factors (P < .05). In general, the force and moment on an implant were greater when the load was applied directly over the implant or at MA. DISCUSSION: While not significant at every loading location, the largest implant forces tended to occur with ZAAG attachments; the smallest were found with the SEW, the SEO, the NSB, the CK-70, and the CK-90. Typically, higher moments existed for NBC and ZAAG, while lower moments existed for SEW, SEO, NSB, CK-90, and CK-70. CONCLUSION: For different loading locations, significant differences were found among the different overdenture attachment systems.

Analysis of Variance↗