Bone response to submerged, unloaded implants inserted in poor bone sites: a histological and histomorphometrical study of 8 titanium implants retrieved from man.

An important parameter that influences the long-term success of oral implants is the bone quality of the implant bed. Posterior areas of the jaws have been avoided in implant dentistry because of their poor bone quality, higher chewing forces, and presumed higher implant failure rates. Several researchers have deemed soft bone implant sites to be a great potential risk situation, and most failures have been found in sites where the bone density was already low. The inferior success rates in the posterior maxilla have been attributed to a lower bone density and a lesser bone-implant interface. The aim of the present study was a histological and histomorphometrical analysis of the bone response to submerged implants inserted in posterior areas of the human jaws and retrieved, for different causes, after healing periods varying from 6 weeks to 12 months. Eight submerged implants that had been retrieved for different causes after different healing periods were evaluated in the present study. All implants were submerged and unloaded. Three implants had been removed for inadequate patient adaptation, 2 for inability of the implant to meet changed prosthetic needs, 1 for not optimal position from esthetic and hygiene aspects, and the last 2 for pain and dysesthesia. All the implants were retrieved with a 5-mm trephine bur. Newly formed peri-implant bone was found in all implants even after shorter healing periods. The bone-implant contact percentage varied from 30% to 96%. In conclusion, some surfaces have an improved characteristic of contact osteogenesis in soft bone, with coverage of the implant surface with a bone layer as a base for intensive bone formation and remodeling. We documented osseointegration of implants with a rough surface even after an insertion period of less than 2 months, both in the mandible and in the maxilla. From these results, we tentatively extrapolate that these implants might be carefully loaded after 2 months of healing, even when inserted in soft bone. A higher removal torque value might lead to a more predictable use of shorter implants, to a support of a prosthesis with fewer implants, or to shorter healing periods.