Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 307

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time

Hermann, Joachim S., Buser, Daniel, Schenk, Robert K., Higginbottom, Frank L., Cochran, David L.·2000·Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract

Research in implant dentistry has mainly focused on hard tissue integration with much less data available with regards to soft tissue integration involving epithelium and connective tissue. In the present study, the implantogingival junction of unloaded and loaded non‐submerged titanium implants has been analyzed histometrically in the canine mandible. In 6 foxhounds, 69 implants were placed. Dogs in the unloaded group were sacrificed 3 months after implant placement. Loaded implants were restored with gold crowns and those dogs were sacrificed after 3 months and 12 months of loading. Non‐decalcified histologic sections were analyzed histometrically measuring the dimensions of the Sulcus Depth (SD), the Junctional Epithelium (JE), and the Connective Tissue Contact (CTC). Histometric evaluation revealed that significant changes within tissue compartments (SD, JE, CTC) occurred over time (P<0.05). Sulcus Depth had a mean of 0.49 mm and 0.50 mm after 3 months and 6 months of healing, but after 15 months was 0.16 mm which was significantly different. Similarly, the length of the Junctional Epithelium after 3 months and 6 months of healing was 1.16 mm and 1.44 mm, respectively, and these values were significantly different from measurements taken after 15 months (1.88 mm). The area of Connective Tissue Contact showed a different pattern of change in that after 3 months of healing (1.36 mm) it was significantly different from the same area after 6 months and 15 months which were 1.01 mm and 1.05 mm, respectively. Interestingly, the sum of SD, JE, and CTC, forming the Biologic Width, did not change over the observation period (P>0.05). These data indicate that the Biologic Width is a physiologically formed and stable structure over time in the case of non‐submerged, one‐piece titanium implants as evaluated histometrically under unloaded and loaded conditions. Dynamic changes did occur, however, within the overall Biologic Width dimension. Thus, the use of non‐submerged, one‐piece implants allow for stable overall peri‐implant soft tissues as evaluated under loaded conditions for up to 12 months.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001001.x

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 307

Metadata

Authors
Hermann, J. S., Buser, D., Schenk, R. K., Higginbottom, F. L., & Cochran, D. L.
Venue
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-02
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
1-11
ISSN
  • 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0501
OpenAlex
W1970990735
Cited by
307
References
22
FWCI
10.06
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001001.x
The paper
Hermann, J. S., Buser, D., Schenk, R. K., Higginbottom, F. L., & Cochran, D. L. (2000). Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001001.x

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.