2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.materresbull.2012.10.037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surface characterization, electrochemical properties and in vitro testing of hierarchically structured titanium surfaces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
4
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
(55 reference statements)
0
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…After three months, mucoperiosteal flaps were elevated bilaterally in the mandible and, using a non‐submerged technique, four implants, 3.6 × 11 mm (EV Astra Tech Implant System TM , Dentsply Implants IH AB) with two different surface characteristics (A and B) were installed on each side. The implant surface modification in group‐A implants was categorized as moderately rough according to Albrektsson and Wennerberg () and consisted of a combination of TiO‐blasting and acid‐etching (Sa 1.49 µm), while the surface modification in group B implants was categorized as smooth (Albrektsson & Wennerberg, ) and included only acid‐etching (Sa 0.36 µm) (Johansson, Gretzer, Jimbo, Mattisson, & Ahlberg, ; Mattisson, Gretzer, & Ahlberg, ; Thalji, Gretzer, & Cooper, ). The sequence of implant positioning was randomized between dogs but consistent between right and left side of the mandible within each animal.…”
Section: Methodscontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…After three months, mucoperiosteal flaps were elevated bilaterally in the mandible and, using a non‐submerged technique, four implants, 3.6 × 11 mm (EV Astra Tech Implant System TM , Dentsply Implants IH AB) with two different surface characteristics (A and B) were installed on each side. The implant surface modification in group‐A implants was categorized as moderately rough according to Albrektsson and Wennerberg () and consisted of a combination of TiO‐blasting and acid‐etching (Sa 1.49 µm), while the surface modification in group B implants was categorized as smooth (Albrektsson & Wennerberg, ) and included only acid‐etching (Sa 0.36 µm) (Johansson, Gretzer, Jimbo, Mattisson, & Ahlberg, ; Mattisson, Gretzer, & Ahlberg, ; Thalji, Gretzer, & Cooper, ). The sequence of implant positioning was randomized between dogs but consistent between right and left side of the mandible within each animal.…”
Section: Methodscontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…The P25 particles attached to titanium show typical diffraction pattern with a ratio between anatase and rutile of ~4/1 [22]. For the TS + AT-I modification, no diffraction peaks from the oxide can be observed, which indicates that the precipitated layer is amorphous or too thin to be detected [16]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The carbon signal is similar for all samples and is related to surface contamination. XPS for the AT-I modification has been studied in detail elsewhere and shows that the oxide film may contain oxalate from the formation process [16]. In this case, a small Ti metal signal is observed illustrating that some parts of the surface have a thin oxide film.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations