ArticleScientific reports2026
Apatite-coated implant surfaces exhibit superior biological, immunological, and mechanical properties compared to sandblasted acid-etched surfaces.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sintering Method-Dependent Hydroxyapatite Coatings Drive Enhanced Gingival Fibroblast Behavior on Titanium Implant Surfaces.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Implant surface modification techniques have shifted from simple mechanical modifications to sophisticated strategies aimed at modulating biological responses at the bone-implant interface. This study aimed to compare sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) and apatite-coated dental implant surfaces, focusing on their biological, immunological, and mechanical performance. Surface morphology and wettability were assessed by field emission scanning electron microscopy and liquid spreading tests, respectively. In vitro assays evaluated osteoblast adhesion, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) staining, and mineralization. In vivo performance was examined using rat femoral condyle loosening and calvarial defect models to assess early bone formation, macrophage polarization, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression. A beagle mandibular tooth extraction model was used to measure removal torque (RT) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). The apatite-coated surface exhibited a uniform nanostructured apatite layer with superior wettability compared to the SLA surface. In vitro, apatite-coated surface significantly enhanced osteoblast adhesion and mineralization (p < 0.05). In vivo, apatite-coated surface promoted peri-implant bone formation, accelerated the shift from M1 to M2 macrophages, and increased VEGF expression. In the beagle model, apatite-coated implants demonstrated higher RT and BIC at all time points. Apatite-coated on dental implants enhances osseointegration through combined biological, mechanical, and immunomodulatory effects, promoting rapid bone healing and stable implant fixation.
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.