Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30972600›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2019

Comparative in vivo study of alloy titanium implants with two different surfaces: biomechanical and SEM analysis.

Francisley Ávila Souza, Thayane Silveira Mata Furtado, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos Dayube, Willian Moraes Melo, Renato Sussumu Nishioka, Pier Paolo Poli, Carlo Maiorana, Paulo Sérgio Perri de Carvalho

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Francisley Ávila SouzaDepartment of Surgery and Integrated Clinic, Araçatuba Dental School, São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo, Brazil. f.avilasouza@foa.unesp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1427-071X
Thayane Silveira Mata FurtadoImplant Dentistry Postgraduate Program, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, Brazil.
Ulisses Ribeiro Campos DayubeImplant Dentistry Postgraduate Program, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, Brazil.
Willian Moraes MeloDepartment of Surgery and Integrated Clinic, Araçatuba Dental School, São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo, Brazil.
Renato Sussumu NishiokaDepartment of Materials Dental and Prosthesis, São José dos Campos Dental of School, São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo, Brazil.
Pier Paolo PoliImplant Center for Edentulism and Jawbone Atrophies, Maxillofacial Surgery and Odontostomatology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Maggiore Policlinico Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Carlo MaioranaImplant Center for Edentulism and Jawbone Atrophies, Maxillofacial Surgery and Odontostomatology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Maggiore Policlinico Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Paulo Sérgio Perri de CarvalhoDepartment of Surgery and Integrated Clinic, Araçatuba Dental School, São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo, Brazil.
Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic · BRUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of the interface formed between bone and implants with machined surfaces (MS) and those modified by Al MATERIALS AND

methodsBefore surgery, topographic characterization was performed by SEM-EDX and by mean roughness measurements. Ten Albinus rabbits received randomly 20 Ti-6Al-4V implants on its right and left tibiae, with one implant placed in each tibia. After implant insertion, the implant stability quotient (ISQ) was measured by means of resonance frequency analysis (RFA). After 3 and 6 weeks, the ISQ was again measured, followed by torque removal measurements. Analysis of variance and Tukey tests were used to analyze the data. The surface of the implants removed was evaluated by SEM-EDX. Immunohistochemical analysis of osteopontin (OPN) and osteocalcin (OC) protein was performed in bone tissue.

resultsThe topographic characterization showed differences between the analyzed surfaces, and the mean roughness values of SBAS group were statistically higher than MS. Overall, higher statistically significant ISQ values were observed in the SBAS group compared to the MS group (p = 0.012). The intra-group comparison of ISQ values in the SBAS group showed statistically significant differences between 0 and 3 weeks (p = 0.032) and 0 and 6 weeks (p = 0.003). The torque removal measurements of group SBAS were statistically higher when compared with the torque removal measurements of group MS in the time intervals of 3 weeks (p = 0.002) and 6 weeks (p < 0.001). SEM-EDX of the implant surfaces removed in SBAS group showed greater bone tissue covering and mean values atomic in percentage of Ca, P, and O statistically superior (p < 0.05) than MS group. Immunohistochemical reactions showed intense OC immunolabeling at 6 weeks postoperative for SBAS group.

conclusionsThe topographical modifications made in group SBAS allowed a better mechanical interlocking between the implant and bone tissue.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsOsseointegrationTitaniumAlloysAnimalsDental Prosthesis DesignRabbitsRandom AllocationSurface PropertiesTorqueAlloysDental ImplantsTitaniumBiomechanicsDental implantOsseointegrationSurface modification

Identifiers

PMID30972600
OpenAlexW2936237892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.