Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Use of Human Perivascular Stem Cells for Bone Regeneration
Published on: May 25, 2012
Can the Macrogeometry of Dental Implants Influence Guided Bone Regeneration in Buccal Bone Defects? Histomorphometric
Manuel Fernández-Domínguez1, Victor Ortega-Asensio2, Elena Fuentes-Numancia3
1Maxillofacial Department HM Hospitals, Doctoral Program of Translational Medicine, CEU San Pablo University, 28223 Madrid, Spain. clinferfun@yahoo.es.
Abstract:
The aim of this experimental animal study was to assess guided bone regeneration (GBR) and implant stability (ISQ) around two dental implants with different macrogeometries. Forty eight dental implants were placed within six Beagle dogs. The implants were divided into two groups (n = 24 per group): G1 group implants presented semi-conical macrogeometry, a low apical self-tapping portion, and an external hexagonal connection (whereby the cervical portion was bigger than the implant body). G2 group implants presented parallel walls macrogeometry, a strong apical self-tapping portion, and an external hexagonal connection (with the cervical portion parallel to the implant body). Buccal (mouth-related) defects of 2 mm (c2 condition) and 5 mm (c3 condition) were created. For the control condition with no defect (c1), implants were installed at crestal bone level. Eight implants in each group were installed under each condition. The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was measured immediately after implant placement, and on the day of sacrifice (3 months after the implant placement). Histological and histomorphometric procedures and analysis were performed to assess all samples, measuring crestal bone loss (CBL) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). The data obtained were compared with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The ISQ results showed a similar evolution between the groups at the two evaluation times, although higher values were found in the G1 group under all conditions. Within the limitations of this animal study, it may be concluded that implant macrogeometry is an important factor influencing guided bone regeneration in buccal defects. Group G1 showed better buccal bone regeneration (CBL) and BIC % at 3 months follow up, also parallel collar design can stimulate bone regeneration more than divergent collar design implants. The apical portion of the implant, with a stronger self-tapping feature, may provide better initial stability, even in the presence of a bone defect in the buccal area.
Related Concept Videos
Spongy Bone
Spongy bone is more porous, and less dense compared to compact bone. It is composed of concentric lamellae that are arranged irregularly to form the trabecular network. In some bones, the spaces between trabeculae contain red marrow, where...
Compact Bone
Compact bone, also called cortical bone, is the denser, stronger of the two types of bone tissue. It is found under the periosteum and in the diaphyses of long bones, where it provides support and protection. The microscopic structural unit of compact bone is called an osteon, or haversian system. Each osteon is composed of concentric rings of calcified...
Bone Disorders
Bone deposition is also affected by the levels of sex hormones like estrogen and testosterone that promote osteoblast activity and bone matrix synthesis. When the level of these hormones decreases due to aging, it causes a reduction in bone deposition. As a result, bone resorption by osteoclasts...
The Hyoid Bone
Bone Structure
Bone Remodeling

