The effect of bone anchoring and micro-grooves on the soft tissue reaction to implants

Here we aimed to compare the tissue reaction to smooth and micro-grooved implants, at different implantation sites. We hypothesised that subperiosteally less mobility is to be expected between an implant and the surrounding tissue, which can lead to a more subdued tissue response. In addition, we hypothesised that a similar effect can be reached when substrata are equipped with micro-grooves. Poly- -lactic acid smooth or micro-grooved surfaces (width 2 or 10 μm, depth 1 μm) were implanted subperiosteally on the frontal bone of the skull, or subcutaneously in the flanks of goats for 2, 4 and 12 weeks. After sacrifice, implants and surrounding tissue were histologically processed. Light microscopical and histomorphometrical evaluation of the histomorphometrical analyses, capsule thickness, capsule quality and implant–tissue interface was performed. In addition, we stained for α-smooth muscle actin, collagen and CD-68 expression. All implants were surrounded by a fibrous capsule. Capsules around subperiosteal implants were more matured than around subcutaneous implants. In time, capsule thickness significantly decreased around subperiosteal implants, but increased around subcutaneous implants. Also, nowhere differences were found in the presence of collagen or α-smooth muscle actin. The interfacial cells around all implants frequently showed staining for the monocyte–macrophage marker CD-68. We concluded that in this model, decreased mobility of an implant relative to the surrounding tissue did positively influence the peri-implant tissue response, but the applied surface topography did not.