The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans: Early osseointegration on implant surfaces
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.
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
Cited by
Review on titanium and titanium based alloys as biomaterials for orthopaedic applications
Kaur, M., & Singh, K. (2019) · Materials Science and Engineering: C · doi:10.1016/j.msec.2019.04.064 · Cited by 1,451
Bosshardt, D. D., Chappuis, V., & Buser, D. (2017) · Periodontology 2000 · doi:10.1111/prd.12179 · Cited by 574
Self-citationNano-scale modification of titanium implant surfaces to enhance osseointegration
Souza, J. C. M., Sordi, M. B., Kanazawa, M., Ravindran, S., Henriques, B., Silva, F. S., Aparicio, C., & Cooper, L. F. (2019) · Acta Biomaterialia · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.045 · Cited by 544
Osseointegration – communication of cells
Terheyden, H., Lang, N. P., Bierbaum, S., & Stadlinger, B. (2012) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02327.x · Cited by 265
Self-citationHamlet, S., Alfarsi, M., George, R., & Ivanovski, S. (2012) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02325.x · Cited by 150
Self-citation
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.