Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 466

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans: Early osseointegration on implant surfaces

Lang, Niklaus P., Salvi, Giovanni E., Huynh-Ba, Guy, Ivanovski, Saso, Donos, Nikolaos, Bosshardt, Dieter D.·2011·Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate and degree of osseointegration at chemically modified moderately rough, hydrophilic (SLActive) and moderately rough, hydrophobic (SLA) implant surfaces during early phases of healing in a human model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The devices used for this study of early healing were 4 mm long and 2.8 mm in diameter and had either an SLActive chemically modified or a moderately rough SLA surface configuration. These devices were surgically installed into the retro-molar area of 49 human volunteers and retrieved after 7, 14, 28 and 42 days of submerged healing. A 5.2-mm-long specially designed trephine with a 4.9 mm inside diameter, allowing the circumferential sampling of 1 mm tissue together with the device was applied. Histologic ground sections were prepared and histometric analyses of the tissue components (i.e. old bone, new bone, bone debris and soft tissue) in contact with the device surfaces were performed. RESULTS: All device sites healed uneventfully. All device surfaces were partially coated with bone debris. A significant fraction of this bone matrix coating became increasingly covered with newly formed bone. The process of new bone formation started already during the first week in the trabecular regions and increased gradually up to 42 days. The percentage of direct contact between newly formed bone and the device (bone-to-implant contact) after 2 and 4 weeks was more pronounced adjacent to the SLActive than to the SLA surface (14.8% vs. 12.2% and 48.3% vs. 32.4%, respectively), but after 42 days, these differences were no longer evident (61.6% vs. 61.5%). CONCLUSION: While healing showed similar characteristics with bone resorptive and appositional events for both SLActive and SLA surfaces between 7 and 42 days, the degree of osseointegration after 2 and 4 weeks was superior for the SLActive compared with the SLA 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02172.x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 466

Metadata

Authors
Lang, N. P., Salvi, G. E., Huynh-Ba, G., Ivanovski, S., Donos, N., & Bosshardt, D. D.
Venue
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-03-09
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
349-356
ISSN
0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1849295147
Cited by
466
References
0
FWCI
26.84
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: Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans: Early osseointegration on implant surfaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02172.x
The paper
Lang, N. P., Salvi, G. E., Huynh-Ba, G., Ivanovski, S., Donos, N., & Bosshardt, D. D. (2011). Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans: Early osseointegration on implant surfaces. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02172.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.