ArticleScientific reports2021
Osseointegration of a novel dental implant in canine.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunohistochemical evaluation of bone regeneration induced by human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells around implants in an osteoporotic rat model.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- A blood glucose fluctuation-responsive delivery system promotes bone regeneration and the repair function of Smpd3-reprogrammed BMSC-derived exosomes.International journal of oral science · 2024Article
- Preclinical Experimental Study on New Cervical Implant Design to Improve Peri-Implant Tissue Healing.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Suitability of Trabecular Patterns in the Assessment of Dental Implant Osseointegration Process through 2D Digital and 3D CBCT Radiographs.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Metal-polyphenol networks-modified tantalum plate for craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- High porosity 3D printed titanium mesh allows better bone regeneration.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Bioreactor analyses of tissue ingrowth, ongrowth and remodelling around implants: An alternative to live animal testing.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Biodegradable Hydrogel Beads Combined with Calcium Phosphate Bone Cement for Bone Repair: In Vitro and In Vivo Characterization.Polymers · 2022Article
- Effect of Different Surface Designs on the Rotational Resistance and Stability of Orthodontic Miniscrews: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Study.Sensors (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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare and verify the osseointegration performance of a novel implant (NI) in vivo, which could provide a useful scientific basis for the further development of NIs. Thirty-two NIs treated with hydrofluoric acid and anodization and sixteen control implants (CIs) were placed in the mandibles of 8 beagles. Micro-CT showed that the trabecular number (Tb.N) significantly increased and trabecular separation (Tb.Sp) significantly decreased in the NIs at 2 weeks. Significant differences were found in the trabecular thickness, Tb.N, Tb.Sp, bone surface/bone volume ratio, and bone volume/total volume ratio between the two groups from the 2nd-4th weeks. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in the bone volume density at 2, 4, 8, or 12 weeks or bone-implant contact at 2 or 4 weeks, but the BIC in the CIs was higher than that in the NIs at the 8th and 12th weeks. Meanwhile, the histological staining showed a similar osseointegration process between the two groups over time. Overall, the NIs could be used as new potential implants after further improvement.
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.