Radiographic and histologic assessment of osseointegration for surface-treated titanium dental implants: An experimental study in dogs.

Background: Modifying the dental implant's surface texture enhances its biological response to the bone and implant‒tissue interface, resulting in the successful support of forces. This study assessed the impact of sandblasting, sandblasting plus acid etching, Er,Cr:YSGG laser, and propolis implant surface treatments and occlusal load on the osseointegration of titanium dental implants in dogs.

Methods: Seventy-two titanium dental implants with a diameter of 4 mm and a length of 10 mm were divided into four groups according to implant surface modifications (n=18 for each group): group A: sandblasting plus acid etching, group B: sandblasting with Al O, group C: Er,Cr:YSGG laser, group D: propolis coating. Twenty-four local breed male dogs were used. Premolar teeth (P1, P2, and P3) were extracted on the left side of the mandible, and after 12 weeks of bone healing, implants were unilaterally installed. The osseointegration at three study times from implant installation (14, 90, and 180 days) was evaluated. The dog jaws were scanned using an intraoral scanner for the virtual design of screw-retained three-unit crowns after 90 days of osseointegration. Final radiographs were taken before the animals were sacrificed at 14, 90, and 180 days, and the histological analysis was performed.

Results: Radiographic analysis showed new bone formation (NBF) along and in contact with the implant surface of the treated groups. The histological analysis after 14 days in groups A and B revealed a uniform and ongoing pattern of bone growth and many osteoblasts with few osteocytes within lacunae in new bone trabeculae. Group C showed an increase in the number of osteoblasts lining thin bone trabeculae. Group D showed a generative power concerning bone. At 90 days, there was increased bone ingrowth, and the new bone matured in all the treated implant groups. At 180 days, dense mature bone apposition was in direct contact with delayed-loaded implant surfaces.

Conclusion: A radiographic examination revealed that surface modification significantly impacted osseointegration, with a strong bond between the implant surface and the surrounding bone. The histological sections at the 14-day interval revealed obvious bone remodeling activity, especially in sandblasting plus acid etching and sandblasting-modified implant surface groups. At the 90-day interval, bone ingrowth had increased, and the new bone became mature, especially in sandblasting and propolis surface modification groups. After 180 days of the delayed-loaded implant osseointegration, differences were observed between different implant-treated groups with a remarkable remodeling of the bone, especially in the propolis coating group.