ArticleBMC oral health2022
Early osseointegration of micro-arc oxidation coated titanium alloy implants containing Ag: a histomorphometric study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Ti6Al4V Alloy Surface and Porosity on Bone Osseointegration: In Vivo Pilot Study in Rabbits.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Sulfonated polyether ketone ketone (SPEKK) implant as an alternative to titanium implant-in vivo study on Wistar Albino rat mandible.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Biomechanical and histomorphometric evaluation of biodegradable mini-implants for orthodontic anchorage in the mandible of beagle dogs.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of micro-arc oxidation coatings with graphene oxide and graphite on osseointegration of titanium implants-an in vivo study.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Article
- Implant Surface Technologies to Promote Spinal Fusion: A Narrative Review.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Micro-arc oxidation (MAO) and its potential for improving the performance of titanium implants in biomedical applications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Comparative evaluation of Microarc Oxidation and sandblasting on the retention of cement-retained implant restorations: AnJournal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate bone response to micro-arc oxidation coated titanium alloy implants containing Ag.
methods144 titanium alloy implants were prepared by machine grinding and divided into three treatment groups as following, SLA group: sand-blasting and acid-etched coating; MAO group: micro-arc oxidation without Ag coating; MAO + Ag group: micro-arc oxidation containing Ag coating. Surface characterization of three kind of implants were observed by X-ray diffraction, energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer, scanning electron microscopy, High Resolution Transmission Electron Microscope and roughness analysis. The implants were inserted into dog femurs. 4, 8 and 12 weeks after operation, the bone response to the implant to the bone was evaluated by push-out experiment, histological and fluorescent labeling analysis.
resultsMAO + Ag group consisted of a mixture of anatase and rutile. Ag was found in the form of Ag
conclusionThe micro-arc oxidation combination with Ag coating is an excellent surface modification technique to posse porous surface structure and hydrophilicity on the titanium alloy implants surface and exhibits desirable ability of osseointegration.
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.