Fig. 4

µCT images showing pattern of osteogenesis in response to implant surface topography. Images of the entire calvarial wound site including the Ti implant in the defect with the a TiMA and b TiNT implants at day 42 post-surgery. Note that the margins of the osteotomy are more easily seen with TiMA implants due to the fact that less bone has grown into the healing volumes. With TiNT implant, in one healing volume the surface of the implant is completely occupied with bone (arrow), and in another bone is growing into the healing volume along the implant surface forming a Baud curve (arrowhead) typical of contact osteogenesis (see text). c–f Magnified images of the scans in a, b but at two different depths in the healing volumes around the c, d TiMA surface and the e, f TiNT surface. Scale bars (a, b): 1 mm. g Quantitative analysis of bone regeneration parameters (Bone Volume/Total Volume and Bone Implant Contact) in TiMA and TiNT groups at day 42 post-surgery. Data is shown as mean ± SEM (n = 4, two-sided Student’s t-test performed to compare groups, ***P < 0.001). h Schematic showing the coronal view of the CIWC