Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 22, 2026
The Establishment of a Murine Mandibular Molar Extraction Socket Healing Model
Published on: January 13, 2023
Healing at implants placed in an alveolar ridge with a sloped configuration: an experimental study in dogs
Ingemar Abrahamsson1, Maria Welander, Elena Linder
1Associate professor, Department of Periodontology, Institution of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sweden Assistant professor, Department of Periodontology, Institution of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sweden Research coordinator, Department of Periodontology, Institution of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sweden Professor, Department of Periodontology, Institution of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Purpose:
To study healing around implants placed in an alveolar ridge with a sloped lingual-buccal configuration.
Materials And Methods:
Six Labrador dogs were used. Buccal bone defects were prepared in the mandible after extraction of premolars. Three months later, two test implants with a sloped marginal design and two control implants were placed in the chronic defect area with a sloped lingual-buccal configuration of each premolar region. The test implants were placed in such a way that the buccal margin of the implant coincided with the buccal bone crest. The lingual margin of the control implants was placed to a similar depth as the lingual margin of the test implants. Abutments were connected to the implants in the right mandibular premolar region and flaps were sutured around the neck of the abutments. In the left side of the mandible, cover screws were placed and the flaps were sutured to cover the implants. Biopsies were obtained 4 months later and prepared for histological examination.
Results:
It was demonstrated that healing around implants placed in an alveolar ridge with a sloped lingual-buccal configuration resulted in the preservation of a vertical discrepancy between the lingual and buccal marginal bone levels around implants with either a regular cylindrical outline or a modified marginal portion that matched the slope of the alveolar ridge.
Conclusion:
As the marginal buccal portion of the control implants with a regular design had no bone support, it is suggested that implants with a modified marginal portion may be considered in recipient sites with a sloped lingual-buccal configuration.
