Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35735590›Full record

ReviewBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Biomimetic Implant Surfaces and Their Role in Biological Integration-A Concise Review.

Mariana Brito Cruz, Neusa Silva, Joana Faria Marques, António Mata, Felipe Samuel Silva, João Caramês

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Lateral Spacing of TiOBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Mariana Brito CruzUniversidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), Rua Professora Teresa Ambrósio, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6798-0208
Neusa SilvaUniversidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), LIBPhys-FTC UID/FIS/04559/2013, Rua Professora Teresa Ambrósio, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3454-065X
Joana Faria MarquesUniversidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), Rua Professora Teresa Ambrósio, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8740-642X
António MataUniversidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), Rua Professora Teresa Ambrósio, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal.
Felipe Samuel SilvaCenter for Microelectromechanical Systems (CMEMS), Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal.
João CaramêsBone Physiology Research Group, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Rua Professora Teresa Ambrósio, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5544-3744

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia This research was supported by FCT project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-030498-Portugal, by FEDER funds through the COMPETE 2020-Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionali-zação (POCI) and ImpHib - Development of advanced Hybrid Implants - NORTE-01-0247-
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increased use of dental implants in oral rehabilitation has been followed by the development of new biomaterials as well as improvements in the performance of biomaterials already in use. This triggers the need for appropriate analytical approaches to assess the biological and, ultimately, clinical benefits of these approaches.

aimsTo address the role of physical, chemical, mechanical, and biological characteristics in order to determine the critical parameters to improve biological responses and the long-term effectiveness of dental implant surfaces. DATA SOURCES AND

methodsWeb of Science, MEDLINE and Lilacs databases were searched for the last 30 years in English, Spanish and Portuguese idioms.

resultsChemical composition, wettability, roughness, and topography of dental implant surfaces have all been linked to biological regulation in cell interactions, osseointegration, bone tissue and peri-implant mucosa preservation.

conclusionTechniques involving subtractive and additive methods, especially those involving laser treatment or embedding of bioactive nanoparticles, have demonstrated promising results. However, the literature is heterogeneous regarding study design and methodology, which limits comparisons between studies and the definition of the critical determinants of optimal cell response.

Indexed as

biomimeticdental implantsdentistryimplant surfaceoral rehabilitationoral surgeryosseointegration

Identifiers

PMID35735590
PMCPMC9220941

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.