Figure 6.

Scaffold characterization in patients: radiologic and histologic analyses. A‐C, Cone‐beam tomogram, coronal slice, at T1 (1 month), T2 (24 months), and T3 (36 months) after surgery. A, The prosthesis maintained its granular structure, whereas the granules did not migrate to the surrounding soft tissues. The structure of the prosthesis is radiotransparent compared with the compact portion of the zygomatic bone (T1). B, Cone‐beam tomogram, coronal slice, at 24 months after surgery. The prosthesis seems to adhere strongly to the underlying zygomatic bone in patients. The granular structure is still distinguishable, although less evident, whereas the partial radiotransparency evolved to a radiopacity similar to that seen in the compact part of the native bone, making it impossible to distinguish the interface between the prosthesis and bone. C, Cone‐beam tomogram, coronal slice, at 36 months after surgery. Progressive loss of definition of the granular architecture, with an almost complete radiopacity and apparent corticalization of the bone in contact with the prosthesis. The interface between the prosthesis and bone at T3 appears indistinguishable. D, Biopsies harvested 24 months after implant placement. Bone maturation gradient can be observed proceeding from the periosteal layer toward the native bone (hematoxylin and eosin stain: magnification ×10). Osteoclasts surrounding hydroxylapatite residual granules (immunohistochemistry with cathepsin K (magnification ×20)