The critical-size supraalveolar peri-implant defect model: Reproducibility in histometric data acquisition of alveolar bone formation and osseointegration

Objective: The objective of this report is to present the reproducibility of outcomes assessments in the Critical-Size Supraalveolar Peri-Implant Defect Model. Materials and Methods: Two examiners without specific experience in histological analysis and one experienced examiner performed the histometric evaluation. A comprehensive training program in data acquisition and histological analysis was established, the inexperienced examiners underwent approximately 12 h of training over multiple sessions. A custom-designed image analysis software macro and a computer-based image system were used to analyse digital images generated by a microscope camera system. Nine parameters for newly formed and resident bone were evaluated. Examiners performed histometric analysis using 36 histologic sections selected from critical-size supraalveolar peri-implant defects in 12 male Hound Labrador Mongrel dogs. Buccal and lingual measurements were performed in 72 sites. Intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility were evaluated using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and means ± SD of the differences. Systematic errors were evaluated using an F-test for equality of means and variances. Results: Intra-examiner reproducibility was high for all parameters evaluated, the lowest CCC observed being 0.87. Inter-examiner reproducibility was also high, most CCCs exceeding 0.90. Minor systematic errors for intra- and inter-examiner comparisons were occasionally observed. The results imply a high temporal stability because recordings were performed 3 months apart. Measurement errors were stable throughout the range of observations for all parameters. Conclusions: High examiner reproducibility and temporal stability can be achieved for histometric data acquisition using the Critical-Size Supraalveolar Peri-Implant Defect Model. Examiner reproducibility should be routinely assessed, reported, and accounted for to assure the quality of evidence generated by preclinical studies