ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Early osseointegration of two in-house 3D-printed porous titanium implant designs: an
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Early osseointegration is critical for long-term implant stability, and in-house 3D-printed porous surfaces may enhance bone integration by promoting cellular migration and tissue formation, provided that porosity is balanced with sufficient mechanical strength. This randomized animal study assessed whether statistically significant differences exist between custom 3D-printed titanium implants with a pore size of 630 μm and porosity of 73.9% (P1) and implants with a pore size of 690 μm and porosity of 69.1% (P2) regarding mechanical and histological osseointegration. Methods: Twenty stable, non-weight- bearing cylindrical implants (6 × 10 mm), comprising ten P1 and ten P2 implants, were randomly inserted into the medial left femoral condyle of 20 skeletally mature sheep. After 4 weeks, the animals were euthanized, and each specimen was divided into one block for mechanical axial push-out testing and another for histomorphometric evaluation. Results: Statistical analysis using the Mann-Whitney U test demonstrated no significant differences between P1 and P2 in strength (MPa; Discussion: Within the limitations of this study, no statistically significant differences were detected between the two porous implant designs with respect to early osseointegration, and future research should investigate their performance in weight-bearing conditions.
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.