Micro‑computed tomography analysis of mineral attachment to the implants augmented by three types of bone grafts: An experimental study in dogs

This study compared the effect of various grafting materials on the area and volume of minerals attached to dental implants.

In this animal study, 13 dogs were divided into three groups according to the time of sacrificing (2 months, 4 months, or 6 months). The implants were placed in oversized osteotomies, and the residual defects were filled with autograft, bovine bone graft (Cerabone), or a synthetic substitute (Osteon II). At the designated intervals, the dogs were sacrificed and the segmented implants underwent micro‑computed tomography analysis. The bone‑implant area (BIA) and bone‑implant volume (BIV) of bone and graft material were calculated in the region of interest around the implant. The data were analyzed by two‑way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at P < 0.05.

There was no significant difference in BIA and BIV between the healing intervals for any of the grafting materials (P > 0.05). ANOVA exhibited comparable BIA and BIV between the grafting materials at 2 and 4 months after surgery (P > 0.05), although a significant difference was observed after 6 months (P < 0.05). Pairwise comparisons revealed that BIA was significantly greater in the autograft‑stabilized than the synthetic‑grafted sites (P = 0.035). The samples augmented with autograft also showed significantly higher BIV than those treated by the xenogenic (P = 0.017) or synthetic (P = 0.002) particles.

All graft materials showed comparable performance in providing mineral support for implants up to 4 months after surgery. At the long‑term (6‑month) interval, autogenous bone demonstrated significant superiority over xenogenic and synthetic substitutes concerning the bone area and volume around the implant.