2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(00)00362-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cellular reactions and bone apposition to titanium surfaces with different surface roughness and oxide thickness cleaned by oxidation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
19
0
2

Year Published

2001
2001
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
19
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Then, the respiratory burst response of surface-adhering cells reflects a state of activity of the cells, and this is, in general terms, why the simple test may forecast the biocompatibility of materials. This assumption is in accord with the results of longterm studies of titanium implants in bone, showing that the bone contacting area of hydrophilic titanium 30 was considerably lower than typical values of hydrophobic titanium implants. 31 The effect of pores on the biocompatibility of materials seen in this study and reported earlier 7 can be explained along the same line of thought, by a drainage of inflammatory mediators from the surface.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Then, the respiratory burst response of surface-adhering cells reflects a state of activity of the cells, and this is, in general terms, why the simple test may forecast the biocompatibility of materials. This assumption is in accord with the results of longterm studies of titanium implants in bone, showing that the bone contacting area of hydrophilic titanium 30 was considerably lower than typical values of hydrophobic titanium implants. 31 The effect of pores on the biocompatibility of materials seen in this study and reported earlier 7 can be explained along the same line of thought, by a drainage of inflammatory mediators from the surface.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…These findings were related to the composition of the adsorbed protein layers with higher amounts of fibronectin compared to albumin adsorbing to rough surfaces. Others however, present data showing no quantifiable change in cell number or activity, bone formation or removal torque (the force required to extract an implant, serving as a measure of biointegration) for in vivo examination of titanium implants having varying roughness [166]. As a result of this uncertainty it is not surprising that titanium implants currently in clinical use vary with respect to surface roughness.…”
Section: Topographymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Collectively with the physical and chemical aspects, surface roughness determines biological properties of materials. Numerous of works devoted to the roughness of medical devices report changes in adhesion and osteointegration process regarding to the different topography architecture [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. The surface extension in nanoscale improves cell proliferation and osteoblast differentiation [26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%