ArticleORAL & implantology
The influence of micro and macro-geometry in term of bone-implant interface in two implant systems: an histomorphometrical study.
Article in ORAL & implantology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Low-Dose rhBMP-2 and Vacuum Plasma Treatments on Titanium Implants for Osseointegration and Bone Regeneration.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of Gamma Radiation-Induced Crosslinking of Collagen Type I Coated Dental Titanium Implants on Osseointegration and Bone Regeneration.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMany factors could affect the osseous healing of implants such as surface topography of biomaterial, the status of the bone/implant site, implant loading conditions, surgical technique and implant design. The aim of this study was to analyze the BIC of 2 different implants systems characterized by different micro and macrogeometry, that were placed in the posterior maxillary and mandibular jaws of humans, clinically unloaded and retrieved for histomorphometric analyses after 12 weeks. MATERIAL AND
methodThe patients were divided in two groups (Group I and II); group I was composed by 4 patients that each received in the posterior areas of mandible one type A implant [GTB-Plan1Health Amaro (UD) Italy] one type B implant (OsseoSpeed Astra Tech, Dentsply Molndal, Sweden). Group II was composed by 3 patients that each received in the posterior areas of jawsbone one type A implant [GTB-Plan1Health Amaro (UD) Italy] one type B implant (OsseoSpeed Astra Tech, Dentsply Molndal, Sweden). After 12 weeks of healing all the implants of both groups were harvested with the peri-implant bone tissues. Osseointegration process was evaluated throughout measurements of BIC.
resultsNo statistical significance differences were found among the mean percentage of BIC of Group I - type A were 66,51%
conclusionsOur results highlight that the mean percentage of BIC after 12 weeks from the implants placement without functional loading is not influenced by the composition of the implant surface.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.