2001
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1384
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Multi‐Center Study Comparing Dual Acid‐Etched and Machined‐Surfaced Implants in Various Bone Qualities

Abstract: The difference in success rates is most likely attributed to the acid-etched surface characteristics. The greatest performance difference is observed in the conditions of poor quality or soft bone where the 3-year post-loading CSR are 96.8% (dual acid-etched) and 84.8% (machined-surfaced).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

10
101
0
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 154 publications
(117 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
10
101
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The in vitro observations are correlated with in vivo assessments of pull-out strength. There is greater bone-to-implant contact when implants with rough microtopographies are used and greater torque is required to remove the implants after bone healing [2][3][4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The in vitro observations are correlated with in vivo assessments of pull-out strength. There is greater bone-to-implant contact when implants with rough microtopographies are used and greater torque is required to remove the implants after bone healing [2][3][4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many of these are commercially available although some may only have had a short history of commercial life. 11,12 The implant neck design is one of these areas of development. Micro-textured and the macro-textured surfaces were explored.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anodized coatings were evaluated with SEM, TEM, XRD, XPS, and laser microscope. Anodized specimens were implanted in rats' tibia for 14 d, and then extracted.When anodized in concentrated (2 M) H 3 PO 4 aqueous solutions under spark discharge, crystallized anatase transformed to amorphous anatase by containing a large amount of PO [3][4] in crystal lattice of TiO 2 . The amorphous anatase coatings had better osteoconductivity than the crystallized anatase coatings.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The amorphous anatase coatings had better osteoconductivity than the crystallized anatase coatings. It is not exactly clear what was the intrinsic factor for the high osteoconductivity, but the crystallinity of anatase and/or PO [3][4] in the film is considered to be responsible for the difference in bone forming ability of TiO 2 films. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%