Biomechanical and histologic evaluation of non‐washed resorbable blasting media and alumina‐blasted/acid‐etched surfaces

Abstract

To compare the biomechanical fixation and histomorphometric parameters between two implant surfaces: non-washed resorbable blasting media (NWRBM) and alumina-blasted/acid-etched (AB/AE), in a dog model. The surface topography was assessed by scanning electron microscopy, optical interferometry and chemistry by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). Six beagle dogs of ∼1.5 years of age were utilized and each animal received one implant of each surface per limb (distal radii sites). After a healing period of 3 weeks, the animals were euthanized and half of the implants were biomechanically tested (removal torque) and the other half was referred to nondecalcified histology processing. Histomorphometric analysis considered bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO). Following data normality check with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, statistical analysis was performed by paired t-tests at 95% level of significance. Surface roughness parameters S(a) (average surface roughness) and S(q) (mean root square of the surface) were significantly lower for the NWRBM compared with AB/AE. The XPS spectra revealed the presence of Ca and P in the NWRBM. While no significant differences were observed for both BIC and BAFO parameters (P>0.35 and P>0.11, respectively), a significantly higher level of torque was observed for the NWRBM group (P=0.01). Bone morphology was similar between groups, which presented newly formed woven bone in proximity with the implant surfaces. A significant increase in early biomechanical fixation was observed for implants presenting the NWRBM surface.