Bioactivated Implant Surfaces Placed in Healed Sites or Extraction Sockets: A Preliminary Experimental Study in Dogs

Ofer Moses, Franco Bengazi, Mauro Ferri, Francesco Gianfreda, Oaquin Urbizo Velez, Daniele Botticelli, Luigi Canullo*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Purpose: To monitor the early bone reaction in a canine model to a conventional sandblasted and dual acid-etched implant surface (ABT), a nanostructured hydrophilic surface (Nano), a dry salt–bioactivated ultra-hydrophilic surface (Hydro), and a bioactivated nanosurface obtained from the addition of dry salts to the Nano surface (Nano-Active). Materials and Methods: ABT, Nano, Hydro, and Nano-Active implants were placed in 12 dogs. A randomized split-mouth design was adopted. One implant of each type was placed in the mandible 3 months after tooth extraction in healed sites at the first molar region bilaterally. In the same session, the third and fourth premolars were extracted bilaterally and one implant of each type was immediately placed into the extraction socket. The dogs were euthanized at 14 and 28 days following surgery, and the peri-implant bone reaction was assessed histologically using Stevenel’s blue and alizarin red in nondecalcified sections. Results: The postoperative healing was uneventful. The 14-day histologic analysis reported nonsignificant results in terms of difference between the groups, while significant results were found 28 days after surgery. In fact, a significantly higher rate of new bone around the implant was reported in the Nano-Active compared to the Nano groups (51.0% ± 10.2% vs 36.0% ± 10.2%) and Hydro compared to the Nano groups (47.3% ± 10.7% vs 36.0% ± 10.2%). Conclusion: The results obtained indicate that new bone formed after 4 weeks demonstrated a tendency for dry salt– treated bioactivated surfaces to improve bone deposition in the interface in the early stages of healing; however, due to the limited number of dogs, the results failed to show a statistical significance. A study with a significantly larger group of animals should be performed in order to challenge the assumption that ultra-hydrophilic–surface implants might show higher bone-implant contact in immediate postextraction replacement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)963-970
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2022


  • Bioactivated implant surface
  • Histology
  • Histomorphometric
  • Nanosurface
  • Salt-bioactivated surface
  • Surface


Dive into the research topics of 'Bioactivated Implant Surfaces Placed in Healed Sites or Extraction Sockets: A Preliminary Experimental Study in Dogs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this