ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2019
Bioactive characteristics of an implant surface coated with a pH buffering agent: an
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of an AI-Assisted Digital Workflow for Complete-Arch Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Comparative Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of conventional sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) surface coated with a pH buffering solution based on surface wettability, blood protein adhesion, osteoblast affinity, and platelet adhesion and activation.
methodsTitanium discs and implants with conventional SLA surface (SA), SLA surface in an aqueous calcium chloride solution (CA), and SLA surface with a pH buffering agent (SOI) were prepared. The wetting velocity was measured by the number of threads wetted by blood over an interval of time. Serum albumin adsorption was tested using the bicinchoninic acid assay and by measuring fluorescence intensity. Osteoblast activity assays (osteoblast adhesion, proliferation, differentiation, mineralization, and migration) were also performed, and platelet adhesion and activation assays were conducted.
resultsIn both the wetting velocity test and the serum albumin adsorption assay, the SOI surface displayed a significantly higher wetting velocity than the SA surface (
conclusionsSOI exhibited higher hydrophilicity and affinity for proteins, cells, and platelets than SA. Within the limits of this study, it may be concluded that coating an implant with a pH buffering agent can induce the attachment of platelets, proteins, and cells to the implant surface. Further studies should be conducted to directly compare SOI with other conventional surfaces with regard to its safety and effectiveness in clinical settings.
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.