The current investigation followed the protocol depicted in the article by Freire et al. [15] and tried to modify the procedure of induction of peri-implantitis. Freire and coworkers were precoating the implant with bacteria to induce the inflammation. Our design is to induce the peri-implantitis after ossointegration of the implant. However, the implant survival rate is one per 12 of implant or one per six of rats and statistical analysis revealed that the implant true success rate is less than 38.4% at a confident level of 95% by using Clopper-Pearson’s exact method at 95% confidence interval. Therefore, we stopped the experimental protocol at 7 weeks after implantation and obtained samples for analysis. Osseointegration was clearly indicated by periapical X-ray and micro-CT. Meanwhile, micro-CT indicates the maxillary fist molar area could provide substantial cancellous bone to support an implant, indicating to be able to form osseointegration. Subsequently, the successful implant will allow to induce peri-implantitis on the base of osseointegration. The present research revealed maxillary natural diastema does not have substantial cancellous bone under the cortical bone. So even the implant achieves certain amount of osseointegration, it may not be able to further induce clinically relevant peri-implantitis. As a result, this report raises a question to dental implant model study about how to identify a clinical comparable animal model?