Impact of a Static Magnetic Field on Early Osseointegration: A Pilot Study in Canines
Roberta Michels,
Carina Kampleitner,
Toni Dobsak,
Kevin Doppelmayer,
Patrick Heimel,
Stefan Lettner,
Stefan Tangl,
Reinhard Gruber,
César Augusto Magalhães Benfatti
Affiliations
Roberta Michels
Center for Research on Dental Implants (CEPID), School of Dentistry (ODT), Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis 88036-020, Brazil
Carina Kampleitner
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Toni Dobsak
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Kevin Doppelmayer
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Patrick Heimel
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Stefan Lettner
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Stefan Tangl
Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Reinhard Gruber
Austrian Cluster for Tissue Regeneration, 1200 Vienna, Austria
César Augusto Magalhães Benfatti
Center for Research on Dental Implants (CEPID), School of Dentistry (ODT), Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis 88036-020, Brazil
A static magnetic field generated by neodymium–iron–boron (NdFeB) magnets placed in the inner cavity of dental implants can enhance bone regeneration in rabbits. It is, however, unknown whether static magnetic fields support osseointegration in a canine model. We therefore determined the potential osteogenic effect of implants carrying NdFeB magnets inserted in the tibia of six adult canines in the early stages of osseointegration. Here, we report that after 15 days of healing, magnetic and regular implants showed a high variation with a median new bone-to-implant contact (nBIC) in the cortical (41.3% and 7.3%) and the medullary (28.6% and 44.8%) region, respectively. Consistently, the median new bone volume/tissue volume (nBV/TV) in the cortical (14.9% and 5.4%) and the medullary (22.2% and 22.4%) region were not significantly different. One week of healing only resulted in negligible bone formation. These findings suggest that considering the large variation and the pilot nature of this study, magnetic implants failed to support peri-implant bone formation in a canine model.
