Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32244631›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Comparison between Plasma Electrolytic Oxidation Coating and Sandblasted Acid-Etched Surface Treatment: Histometric, Tomographic, and Expression Levels of Osteoclastogenic Factors in Osteoporotic Rats.

Gustavo Antonio Correia Momesso, Anderson Maikon de Sousa Santos, João Matheus Fonseca E Santos, Nilson Cristino da Cruz, Roberta Okamoto, Valentim Adelino Ricardo Barão, Rafael Shinoske Siroma, Jamil Awad Shibli, Leonardo Perez Faverani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Ozone therapy improves early stages of osseointegration in ovariectomized rats.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Gustavo Antonio Correia MomessoDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery. Sao Paulo State University-Unesp. Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.
Anderson Maikon de Sousa SantosDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery. Sao Paulo State University-Unesp. Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.
João Matheus Fonseca E SantosDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery. Sao Paulo State University-Unesp. Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.
Nilson Cristino da CruzTechnological Plasma Laboratory (LaPTec), Experimental Campus of Sorocaba, Sao Paulo State University-Unesp, Sorocaba 18087-180, Brazil.
Roberta OkamotoDepartment of Basic Science. Sao Paulo State University-Unesp. Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 16018-800, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6773-6966
Valentim Adelino Ricardo BarãoDepartment of Prosthodontics and Periodontology. University of Campinas-Unicamp. Piracicaba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 13414-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6391-9917
Rafael Shinoske SiromaDental Research Division, Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, University of Guarulhos (UnG), Guarulhos, SP 07115-230, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7614-6888
Jamil Awad ShibliDental Research Division, Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, University of Guarulhos (UnG), Guarulhos, SP 07115-230, Brazil.
Leonardo Perez FaveraniDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery. Sao Paulo State University-Unesp. Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2249-3048
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRGuarulhos University · BRUniversidade de Sorocaba · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2016/20297-6
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO) has been a promising surface coating with better mechanical and antimicrobial parameters comparing to conventional treatment surfaces. This study evaluated the peri-implant bone repair using (PEO) surface coatings compared with sandblasted acid (SLA) treatment. For this purpose, 44 Wistar rats were ovariectomized (OVX-22 animals) or underwent simulated surgery (SS-22 animals) and received implants in the tibia with each of the surface coatings. The peri-implant bone subsequently underwent molecular, microstructural, bone turnover, and histometric analysis. Real-time PCR showed a higher expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG), receptor activator of nuclear kappa-B ligand (RANKL), and osteocalcin (OC) proteins in the SLA/OVX and PEO/SS groups (

Indexed as

anodic filmsboneexperimentalimplantsoxide coating

Identifiers

PMID32244631
PMCPMC7178360
OpenAlexW3014757168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.