ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2020
Comparative evaluation among laser-treated, machined, and sandblasted/acid-etched implant surfaces: an in vivo histologic analysis on sheep.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Different Innovative Laser Implants Characteristics Histomorphometric and SEM-EDX Comparison for In Vivo Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison Between Micro- and Micro-Nano Surface Texturization in the Initial Osseointegration Process: An Experimental In Vitro and In Vivo Preclinical Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Titanium Surfaces with a Laser-Produced Microchannel Structure Enhance Pre-Osteoblast Proliferation, Maturation, and Extracellular Mineralization In Vitro.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Infrared diode laser enhances human periodontal ligament stem cells behaviour on titanium dental implants.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison between bone-implant interfaces of microtopographically modified zirconia and titanium implants.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Biomimicry and 3D-Printing of Mussel Adhesive Proteins for Regeneration of the Periodontium-A Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Impact of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, Sandblast, and Acid Etching Surface Modification on Surface Topography of Biodental Titanium Implants.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2023Article
- Biomimetic Implant Surfaces and Their Role in Biological Integration-A Concise Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Antibiotic-loaded amphora-shaped pores on a titanium implant surface enhance osteointegration and prevent infections.Bioactive materials · 2021Article
- Histological and Histomorphometric Comparison of Innovative Dental Implants Laser Obtained: Animal Pilot Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Radiographic bone level around particular laser-treated dental implants: 1 to 6 years multicenter retrospective study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2020Article
- Evaluation of bone apposition on surface modified titanium implant in experimental animal model: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the present in vivo analysis was to evaluate the osseointegration process of titanium implants with three different surfaces (machined, sandblasted and acid-etched, and laser-treated) after 15 and 30 days of healing period. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty-six implants with different surfaces were placed in the iliac crest of four Bergamasca sheep. The implant surfaces tested were sandblasted and acid-etched (group A), laser-treated (group B), and fully machined (group C). Two animals were sacrificed after 15 days while the other two after 30 days. Histological and histomorphometric analyses were performed.
resultsAfter 30 days, the bone tissue layer onto implant groups A and B appeared almost continuous with small marrow spaces interruption, while on the machined surface (group C), larger spaces with marrow tissue alternated with the bony trabeculae onto the titanium surface. Implants in groups A and B showed significantly higher implant contact percentage (BIC%) value than group C (P < 0.05). Moreover, it was observed a BIC% increase in both groups A and B between 15 and 30 days while in the machined group (group C), the BIC% decreased.
conclusionResults from the present in vivo analysis revealed that both sandblasted/acid-etched and laser-treated titanium implants, compared to the machined ones, have higher values of osseointegration in less healing time.
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.