ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of osseointegration of plasma treated polyaryletherketone maxillofacial implants.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual reinforcement of PEKK composites with hydroxyapatite and silicon nitride nanowires for enhanced mechanical, tribological, antibacterial, and osteogenic performance.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Next-generation craniomaxillofacial implants for reconstructive surgery: balancing biomechanics, biocompatibility, and bioactivity.International journal of oral science · 2026Review
- Evaluation of bone formation within β-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds in a sheep scapular bioreactor model using micro-computed tomography analysis.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Mechanobiologically-optimized non-resorbable artificial bone for patient-matched scaffold-guided bone regeneration.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Osseointegration is a crucial property of biomaterials used for bone defect repair. While titanium is the gold standard in craniofacial surgeries, various polymeric biomaterials are being explored as alternatives. However, polymeric materials can be bioinert, hindering integration with surrounding tissues. In this investigation, plasma ion immersion implantation (PIII)-treated polyether ether ketone (PEEK) and polyether ketone (PEK) implants were assessed in a sheep maxilla and mandible model. Defects were filled with PIII-treated PEEK and PEK implants, produced through fused filament fabrication (FFF) and selective laser sintering (SLS), respectively. Positive controls were grade 23 titanium implants via selective laser melting, while untreated PEEK implants served as negative controls. Surface analyses using scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy revealed favorable properties. Osseointegration was qualitatively and quantitatively assessed at 8-, 10-, and 12-weeks post-implantation, showing significantly improved outcomes for both PIII-treated PEEK and PEK implants compared to untreated controls. The study suggests PIII treatment enhances FFF-printed PEEK's osseointegration, and PIII-treated SLS-printed PEK achieves comparable osseointegration to 3D printed titanium. These findings underscore surface modification strategies' potential for polymeric biomaterials, offering insights into developing alternative implant materials for craniofacial surgeries, with enhanced biocompatibility and osseointegration capabilities for improved clinical outcomes.
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.