Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 23, 2026

An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Nanomechanical Assessment of Bone Surrounding Implants Loaded for 3 Years in a Canine Experimental Model
Rodolfo B Anchieta1, Márcia V M Guimarães2, Marcelo Suzuki3
1Assistant Professor, Centro Universitario do Norte Paulista (UNORP), São Jose do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil; Visiting Scholar, Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University, New York, NY; Department of Restorative Denstistry, Araçatuba, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), SP, Brazil.
Purpose:
This work evaluated the nanomechanical properties of bone surrounding submerged and immediately loaded implants after 3 years in vivo. It was hypothesized that the nanomechanical properties of bone would markedly increase in immediately and functionally loaded implants compared with submerged implants.
Materials And Methods:
The second, third, and fourth right premolars and the first molar of 10 adult Doberman dogs were extracted. After 6 months, 4 implants were placed in 1 side of the mandible. The mesial implant received a cover screw and remained unloaded. The remaining 3 implants received fixed dental prostheses within 48 hours after surgery that remained in occlusal function for 3 years. After sacrifice, the bone was prepared for histologic and nanoindentation analysis. Nanoindentation was carried out under wet conditions on bone areas within the plateaus. Indentations (n = 30 per histologic section) were performed with a maximum load of 300 μN (loading rate, 60 μN per second) followed by a holding and unloading time of 10 and 2 seconds, respectively. Elastic modulus (E) and hardness (H) were computed in giga-pascals. The amount of bone-to-implant contact (BIC) also was evaluated.
Results:
The E and H values for cortical bone regions were higher than those for trabecular bone regardless of load condition, but this difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). The E and H values were higher for loaded implants than for submerged implants (P < .05) for cortical and trabecular bone. For the same load condition, the E and H values for cortical and trabecular bone were not statistically different (P > .05). The loaded and submerged implants presented BIC values (mean ± standard deviation) of 57.4 ± 12.1% and 62 ± 7.5%, respectively (P > .05).
Conclusion:
The E and H values of bone surrounding dental implants, measured by nanoindentation, were higher for immediately loaded than for submerged implants.
More Related Videos
04:37Half-segmental Diaphyseal Bone Defect Model in Rats for Evaluating Bone Substitute Performance in Load-bearing Regions
Published on: December 30, 2025
07:09In situ Compressive Loading and Correlative Noninvasive Imaging of the Bone-periodontal Ligament-tooth Fibrous Joint
Published on: March 7, 2014