Roughness response genes in osteoblasts

Brett, Peter; Harle, J; Salih, Vehid; Mihoc, R; Olsen, I; Jones, F.H.; Tonetti, Maurizio S.

doi:10.1016/j.bone.2004.03.009

Cited by 216 publications

(153 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nanotechnology involves materials that have a nano-sized topography or are composed of nano-sized materials with a size range between 1 and 100 nm. Nanometer roughness plays an important role in the adsorption of proteins, adhesion of osteoblastic cells and thus the rate of osseointegration (Brett et al, 2004).…”

Section: Surface Roughnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental Implant Surface Enhancement and Osseointegration

Anil¹,

Anand²,

Alghamdi³

et al. 2011

Implant Dentistry - A Rapidly Evolving Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Surface Roughnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental Implant Surface Enhancement and Osseointegration

Anil¹,

Anand²,

Alghamdi³

et al. 2011

Implant Dentistry - A Rapidly Evolving Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Macro-level indeed produces favorable results in respect to primary stability; however, it is associated with ionic leakage and peri-implantitis. Nano-level has been advocated in the past few years as it encourages protein absorption and guides osteoblast adhesion to the titanium surface [73]. Achieving nano-level roughness with current technology deems difficult and expensive.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2017

SF Dent Oral Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and BackgroundBy the 1990's, Branemark's concept made such an impact in clinical dentistry that mainstream clinicians and public acceptance rose significantly to the extent that it adumbrated all other protocols and systems, specifically one-piece (1P) implants. Improper clinical documentation, inclination towards reports of failed cases, and lack of university based implantology programs accelerated the isolation of the alternative approaches. Failure reports are not scientifically sufficient and conclusive enough to

show abstract

“…The effective surface tension, as well as the surface energy related to the topography of surface, is assumed to influence the final interactions of the implant with the surrounding environment. It is also reported that rough surfaces promote better osseointegration than smooth surfaces (Brett et al, 2004;Cochran, 1999;Jansson & Tengvall, 2004;Webster et al, 1999). Treatment of titanium surface by titanium doped hydrocarbon layer is observed to have strong influence on the adsorption of HPF molecules.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%