MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Crestal remodelling and osseointegration at surface‐modified commercially pure titanium and titanium alloy implants in a canine model

2012· article· en· W2113334014 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jaebum Lee, Steve Hurson, Hatem Tadros, Peter Schüpbach, Cristiano Susin, Ulf M. E. Wikesjö

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Of Clinical Periodontology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and Technology
KeywordsOsseointegrationTitaniumDentistryImplantTitanium alloyMaterials scienceBuccal administrationAlloyDental implantMedicineMetallurgySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ti-6Al-7Nb alloys exhibit enhanced mechanical properties and corrosion resistance and may represent an improvement to present commercially pure (CP) titanium oral implant technology. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate crestal remodelling and osseointegration at CP titanium compared with Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy oral implants using a canine model. METHODS: Two threaded anodized CP titanium and two Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy anodized oral implants (ø4.5 × 6.1 mm) were placed into each jaw quadrant in the edentulated posterior mandible in six adult male Hound Labrador mongrel dogs. Abutments were placed onto the implants, and the mucogingival flaps were adapted and sutured for transmucosal wound healing. Block biopsies were collected for histometric analysis following an 8-week healing interval. RESULTS: Healing was uneventful. Bone density outside and within the root of the threads averaged (± SE) 49.0 ± 4.5% and 38.7 ± 5.1% for CP titanium implants and 43.2 ± 3.6% and 34.2 ± 4.8% for Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy implants. Mean osseointegration reached 68.0 ± 4.4% and 62.8 ± 2.5% for CP titanium and Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy implants, respectively. Although crestal resorption at lingual sites averaged 0.2 ± 0.1 mm for both technologies, crestal resorption at buccal sites averaged 0.9 ± 0.2 and 1.0 ± 0.6 mm for CP titanium and Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy implants, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between implant technologies for any parameter assessed. Notably, advanced/advancing buccal crestal resorption exposing the implant threads was observed in 50% of the implants (four of six animals) regardless of implant technology; osteoclastic resorption still observed at 8 weeks following implant placement. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of study, anodized Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy implants may represent a feasible alternative to benchmark anodized CP titanium implants. Remodelling of the buccal crestal plate resulting in advanced bone loss appears a major impediment to oral implant osseointegration and possibly, in extension, implant maintenance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Of Clinical PeriodontologySame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207