2019
DOI: 10.1097/id.0000000000000836
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Influence of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on the Osseointegration of Titanium Implants With Different Surface Modifications—A Histomorphometric Study in High-Fat Diet/Low-Dose Streptozotocin–Treated Rats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(22 reference statements)
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…6 mm failed the most, trailed by implants with lengths of 11 mm and 11-12.6 mm[8]. This is consistent with the findings of Albertson et al Nevertheless, Esposito discovered that implant with a length of 11 to 12.6 mm had the highest probability of failure.…”
supporting
confidence: 88%
“…6 mm failed the most, trailed by implants with lengths of 11 mm and 11-12.6 mm[8]. This is consistent with the findings of Albertson et al Nevertheless, Esposito discovered that implant with a length of 11 to 12.6 mm had the highest probability of failure.…”
supporting
confidence: 88%
“…[22][23][24][25] Some studies have investigated the osteogenesis induced by the use of these different modified Ti surfaces under the DM conditions. Zhou et al reported that, compared with mechanically polished Ti implants, implants with hydroxyapatite coating and SLA surface modification may increase bone integration in rats with type 2 DM; 26 however, other researchers have found that implants with an SLA surface had a lower boneimplant contact rate than those with SLA active surfaces under DM conditions. 27 Feng et al fabricated a honeycomblike Ti6AL4V implant designed by CAD software; they demonstrated that the osteoblasts on porous Ti surface were suppressed under DM conditions.…”
Section: In Vivo Osteogenetic Ability Of Ti Implants With Different Mmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The bone-implant interface can also be investigated with micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), which enables the 3D evaluation of the bone surrounding the implants and does not preclude further assessments afterwards [31][32][33][34][35]. This method overcomes the limits of histological analysis, such as the fact that a single histological section may not be representative of the bone apposition over the whole implant [36], and the fact that it is hard to obtain serial sectioning of bony specimens containing little metal implants positioned in small animals such as mice [37][38][39] and rats [40,41].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%