RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare, through biomechanical and histological analysis, the aluminium (AlO2) and titanium dioxide (TiO2) microparticles for blasting during the sandblasting acid surface treatment in titanium dental implants using a rabbit tibia model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight commercially available titanium dental implants were divided into two test groups (n = 24 per group): implants with surface treated by AlO2 followed by acid etching as control group (Con group) and implants with surface treated by TiO2 followed by acid etching as test group (Test group). The implants were randomly installed in both tibias of eight rabbits and block samples were removed 4 and 8 weeks after implantation. Resonance Frequency Analyses were performed immediately after the implantation and at 8 weeks. Twelve implants of each group were removed to measure the reverse torque. The remaining implants were used for histological analysis. The data were compared using statistical tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: In comparing the implant stability quotient at the two time points, no significant statistical differences were found (P > 0.05), as well as in the removal torque test at 8 weeks after implant placement, no found significant difference between the two groups was tested. Histomorphometric analysis showed a high degree of bone organization in all samples with no significant difference between groups in the bone-to-implant contact (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the results indicate that the media of surface blasting (AlO2 or TiO2 microparticles) did not show significant differences in the tested parameters for assessing the osseointegration of the implants.