MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Importance of Ca<sup>2+</sup> Modifications for Osseointegration of Smooth and Moderately Rough Anodized Titanium Implants – A Removal Torque and Histological Evaluation in Rabbit

2010· article· en· W1913682174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victoria Fröjd, Ann Wennerberg, Victoria Franke Stenport

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådetStiftelserna Wilhelm och Martina LundgrensStiftelsen Handlanden Hjalmar SvenssonsRoyal SocietyKungl. Vetenskaps- och Vitterhets-Samhället i Göteborg
KeywordsOsseointegrationTitaniumAnodizingMaterials scienceImplantScanning electron microscopeBiomedical engineeringFemurDentistryChemistryComposite materialMetallurgyMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Incorporation of Ca(2+) into the titania of anodized titanium surfaces has been found to enhance osseointegration. It provides a stable surface when the ions are incorporated into the oxide layer during the anodizing process. The Ca(2+) may suggestively be prominent sites for mineral induction, attract proteins, and catalyze intracellular cascades. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the osseointegration of smooth (S(a) < 0.5 µm) and moderately rough (S(a) 1.0-2.0 µm) commercially pure titanium implants, with and without Ca(2+) , in order to reflect on the importance of surface chemistry in relation to topography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Anodized implants with (OxCa) or without Ca(2+) (Ox), blasted implants (Bl), and blasted anodized implants, with (BlOxCa) or without Ca(2+) (BlOx), were inserted in rabbit femur and tibia. The implant surfaces were characterized using interferometry, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy prior to implant installation. Removal torque (RTQ) measurements were executed on all implants after a healing period of 12 weeks. The implants were, thereafter, removed en bloc with surrounding tissues and prepared for histological evaluations. RESULTS: RTQ measurements of tibial implants revealed significantly higher values for BlOxCa implants (90.7 ± 23.3 Ncm) compared to OxCa (64.6 ± 18.2 Ncm) and BlOx implants (69.7 ± 17.5 Ncm) (p = 0.029). Ca(2+) modification of smooth implants placed in the femur did not reveal any differences. CONCLUSION: Ca(2+) modification of smooth implants resulted in similar interfacial shear strength as moderately rough implants and Ca(2+) modification of moderately rough implants demonstrated the significantly strongest interfacial shear strength when placed in rabbit tibia. This possibly demonstrated surface chemistry compensating for lesser roughness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207