The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the influence of different surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. Hollow‐cylinder implants with six different surfaces were placed in the metaphyses of the tibia and femur in six miniature pigs. After 3 and 6 weeks, the implants with surrounding bone were removed and analyzed in undecalcified transverse sections. The histologic examination revealed direct bone‐implant contact for all implants. However, the morphometric analyses demonstrated significant differences in the percentage of bone‐implant contact, when measured in cancellous bone. Electropolished as well as the sandblasted and acid pickled (medium grit; HF/HNO 3) implant surfaces had the lowest percentage of bone contact with mean values ranging between 20 and 25%. Sandblasted implants with a large grit and titanium plasmasprayed implants demonstrated 30–40% mean bone contact. The highest extent of bone‐implant interface was observed in sandblasted and acid attacked surfaces (large grit; HCl/H 2 SO 4) with mean values of 50–60%, and hydroxylapatite (HA)‐coated implants with 60–70%. However, the HA coating consistently revealed signs of resorption. It can be concluded that the extent of bone‐implant interface is positively correlated with an increasing roughness of the implant surface.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Buser, D., Weber, H. ‐., & Lang, N. P. (1990) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0501.1990.010105.x · Cited by 724
Self-citation
Cited by
Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration
Le Guéhennec, L., Soueidan, A., Layrolle, P., & Amouriq, Y. (2007) · Dental Materials · doi:10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.025 · Cited by 2,406
Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: A review
AO Research Institute, A. F., Pearce, A., Richards, R., Milz, S., Schneider, E., & Pearce, S. (2007) · European Cells and Materials · doi:10.22203/ecm.v013a01 · Cited by 1,289
Gittens, R. A., McLachlan, T., Olivares-Navarrete, R., Cai, Y., Berner, S., Tannenbaum, R., Schwartz, Z., Sandhage, K. H., & Boyan, B. D. (2011) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.029 · Cited by 827
Impact of Dental Implant Surface Modifications on Osseointegration
Smeets, R., Stadlinger, B., Schwarz, F., Beck-Broichsitter, B., Jung, O., Precht, C., Kloss, F., Gröbe, A., Heiland, M., & Ebker, T. (2016) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2016/6285620 · Cited by 701
Refai, A. K., Textor, M., Brunette, D. M., & Waterfield, J. D. (2004) · Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A · doi:10.1002/jbm.a.30075 · Cited by 296
Metadata
- Authors
- Buser, D., Schenk, R. K., Steinemann, S., Fiorellini, J. P., Fox, C. H., & Stich, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-07
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 889-902
- ISSN
- 0021-9304 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-4636
- OpenAlex
- W2155442777
- Cited by
- 1,719
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 23.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
