Strontium‐Doped Implant Osseointegration Under Dry Preservation Conditions: In Vitro and Rat Model‐Based In Vivo Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop an innovative dry preservation surface modification for strontium-modified pure titanium implants to prevent surface degradation by hydrocarbon pollutants in the air and to enhance osseointegration. METHODS: mixed solution for 12 h, followed by air-drying and storing in sealed glass vials, as the strontium-doped dry preservation (SrP) group. Surface characteristics were analyzed using appropriate instrumentation. Cell adhesion, proliferation, and osteogenic differentiation were assessed in in vitro studies. Forty-eight male Sprague-Dawley rats were included in in vivo studies, with a total of 96 implants placed bilaterally in the tibiae. Micro-CT, removal torque tests, and histological analyses after 4 or 8 weeks were conducted in order to evaluate the osseointegration in each group. RESULTS: Four distinct groups were involved in this study: the SrP group, the freshly prepared strontium-doped (SrF) group, the strontium-doped group with no dry preservation (SrN), and the modified sand-blasted large grit acid-etched (modSLA) group. After 6 months of storage, the SrP surface maintained favorable hydrophilicity, micro-nano morphology, and consistent strontium ion release similar to SrF. Moreover, it maintained similar levels of cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation as SrF while exhibiting significantly better performance than SrN in in vitro studies (p < 0.05). Additionally, after 12 months of storage, it demonstrated excellent osseointegration comparable to the SrF group while significantly outperforming SrN in in vivo studies 4 weeks post-surgery (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The dry preservation surface modification successfully maintained the nanotopography and hydrophilicity of strontium-doped pure titanium implants during 6-12 months of storage, and effectively mitigated the premature release of strontium ions associated with wet preservation methods, thereby significantly preserving the osseointegration performance of strontium-doped titanium implants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".