Titanium implants undergo an aging process through surface hydrocarbon deposition, resulting in decreased wettability and bioactivity. Plasma treatment was shown to significantly reduce surface hydrocarbons, thus improving implant hydrophilicity and enhancing the osseointegration process. This study investigates the effect of plasma surface treatment on bone-to-implant contact (BIC) of implants presenting a nanostructured calcium-incorporated surface (XPEED^®). Following a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) design, patients undergoing implant surgery in the posterior maxilla received additional plasma-treated (n = 7) or -untreated (n = 5) 3.5 × 8 mm implants that were retrieved after a 4-week healing period for histological examination. Histomorphometric analysis showed that plasma-treated implants exhibited a 38.7% BIC rate compared to 22.4% of untreated implants (p = 0.002), indicating enhanced osseointegration potential. Histological images also revealed increased bone formation and active osteoblastic activity around plasma-treated implants when compared to untreated specimens. The findings suggest that plasma treatment improves surface hydrophilicity and biological response, facilitating early bone formation around titanium implants. This study underscores the importance of surface modifications in optimizing implant integration and supports the use of plasma treatment to enhance osseointegration, thereby improving clinical outcomes in implant dentistry and offering benefits for immediate and early loading protocols, particularly in soft bone conditions.

Background: Implant surface topography is a key element in achieving osseointegration. Nanostructured surfaces have shown promising results in accelerating and improving bone healing around dental implants. The main objective of the present clinical and histological study is to compare, at 4 and 6 weeks, (w) bone-to-implant contact in implants having either machined surface (MAC), sandblasted, large grit, acid-etched implant surface (SLA) medium roughness surface or a nanostructured calcium-incorporated surface (XPEED^®). Methods: 35 mini-implants of 3.5 × 8.5 mm with three different surface treatments (XPEED^® (n = 16)—SLA (n = 13)—MAC (n = 6), were placed in the posterior maxilla of 11 patients (6 females and 5 males) then, retrieved at either 4 or 6w in a randomized split-mouth study design. Results: The BIC rates measured at 4w and 6w respectively, were: 16.8% (±5.0) and 29.0% (±3.1) for MAC surface; 18.5% (±2.3) and 33.7% (±3.3) for SLA surface; 22.4% (±1.3) and 38.6% (±3.2) for XPEED^® surface. In all types of investigated surfaces, the time factor appeared to significantly increase the bone to implant contact (BIC) rate (p < 0.05). XPEED^® surface showed significantly higher BIC values when compared to both SLA and MAC values at 4w (p < 0.05). Also, at 6w, both roughened surfaces (SLA and XPEED^®) showed significantly higher values (p < 0.05) than turned surface (MAC). Conclusions: Nanostructured Calcium titanate coating is able to enhance bone deposition around implants at early healing stages.

Clinically evaluate implants placed after ultrasonic implant site preparation (UISP) and standard drilling (SD). Ten patients received 21 implants placed using UISP (n = 11) or SD (n = 10). Bone quality was hand assessed and final insertion torque (IT), resonance frequency analysis (ISQ) at baseline and ISQ, and removal torque values (RTV) at 4 weeks were recorded and compared. Mean IT values were 70.91 and 72.40 N/cm in UISP and SD groups, respectively, and were not statistically different. IT significantly correlated to bone quality. Mean ISQ values at baseline and 4 weeks were not significantly different and were 74.72 and 74.73 for UISP and 76.70 and 73.20 for SD, respectively. Mean ISQ at baseline significantly correlated to IT values and bone quality in both groups. Mean RTV values in both UISP (51.32 N/cm) and SD (53.1 N/cm) were not significantly different but significantly correlated to IT values. All implants achieved osseointegration and were restored. Implant placement after ultrasonic preparation can be considered a predictable technique leading to clinical and biological responses similar to SD 4 weeks after insertion.

Different techniques for the enucleation of jaw cyst lesion in the oral and maxillofacial regions have been proposed, including the bone lid technique. The purpose of this case report is to describe the case of a cystic lesion, approached with the bone lid technique performed using a piezoelectric device, with an 8‐month clinical and radiographic follow‐up. A 14‐year‐old male patient was treated for a suspicious lesion detected on a panoramic radiograph. The concerned area was surgically accessed, and a radiographically predetermined bony window was drawn, and the beveled bony lid was removed. The underlying lesion was enucleated and sent for pathology as a routine procedure, and the removed bony lid was repositioned in situ and secured with a collagen tape. Healing was uneventful with limited swelling and reduced pain. A complete radiographic bone healing at the previously diseased site was confirmed with an 8‐month cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan with no buccal bone resorption nor ridge collapse. The bone lid technique with a piezoelectric device was noninvasive and atraumatic in this case. Further studies are needed and could lead to the adaptation of this approach as a possible standard of care.

This study aimed to histologically evaluate the effects of XPEED^® and SLA surface on the mineral apposition rate (MAR) at 3 and 5 weeks in titanium dental implants placed in human bone. In total, 17 titanium dental implants with XPEED^® surface (n = 9) used as test and SLA surface (n = 8) used as control were included in this study. Each patient received four doses of tetracycline 500 mg at 12 h intervals 2 weeks prior to biopsy retrieval. Implant retrieval was performed, and retrieved biopsies were carefully treated for histomorphometric evaluation under epifluorescence microscopy. At 3 and 5 weeks, newly formed bone appeared in direct contact with both types of tested surfaces. At 3 weeks, the MAR value was, respectively, 2.0 (±0.18) μm/day for XPEED^® implants and 1.5 (±0.10) μm/day for SLA implants (p = 0.017). At 5 weeks, lower MAR values for both XPEED^® and SLA implants were noted, with 1.2 (±0.10) μm/day and 1.1 (±0.10) μm/day, respectively (p = 0.046). The overall evaluation by linear regression analysis for both time and implant surfaces showed a decreased osteoblast activity at 5 weeks compared to 3 weeks (p < 0.005). The results of the present study show that the bone apposition rate occurs faster around implants with XPEED^® surface at 3 weeks and 5 weeks of healing. MAR values may support the use of implants with XPEED^® surfaces in early loading protocols.