Histological imaging is still considered the gold standard for analysing bone formation around metallic implants. Generally, a limited number of histological sections per sample are used for the approximation of mean values of peri-implant bone formation. In this study we compared statistically the results of bone-implant contact (BIC) and bone-implant volume (BIV) obtained by histological sections, with those obtained by X-ray absorption images from synchrotron radiation micro-computed tomography (SRµCT) using osseointegrated screw-shaped implants from a mini-pig study. Comparing the BIC results of 3-4 histological sections per implant sample with the appropriate 3-4 SRµCT slices showed a non-significant difference of 1.9 % (p = 0.703). The contact area assessed by the whole 3D information from the SRµCT measurement in comparison to the histomorphometric results showed a non-significant difference in BIC of 4.9 % (p = 0.171). The amount of the bone-implant volume in the histological sections and the appropriate SRµCT slices showed a non-significant difference by only 1.4 % (p = 0.736) and also remains non-significant with 2.6 % (p = 0.323) using the volumetric SRµCT information. We conclude that for a clinical evaluation of implant osseointegration with histological imaging at least 3-4 sections per sample are sufficient to represent the BIC or BIV for a sample. Due to the fact that in this study we have found a significant intra-sample variation in BIC of up to ± 35 % the selection of only one or two histological sections per sample may strongly influence the determined BIC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bernhardt et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: