Spark discharge anodic oxidation forms a porous oxide film on titanium implant surfaces, which may increase surface roughness and enhance early osseointegration. This study aimed to clinically and histomorphometric compare commercially-available sandblasted (RBM) implants, treated with hydrothermal anodization and placed into an animal maxillary sinus model.
Thirty 3.75 mm × 8.5 mm threaded titanium implants were placed into the maxillary sinuses of 10 sheep via an external approach, with three test groups and 10 implants per group: right side, Control = CP-titanium with RBM surface, Test group 1 = CP-titanium with RBM + anodized surface; left side, Test group 2 = Ti-6Al-7Nb with RBM + anodized surface. Schneiderian membranes were elevated but not bone grafted. Resonant frequency analysis (RFA) was measured at surgery. Animals were sacrificed after 1 month unloaded healing. Resin-embedded undemineralized ground-sections were digitised, and mean bone-implant contact (% BIC) was measured bilaterally for the best-three consecutive threads.
Seven of 30 implants showed signs of failure. RFA was low at placement but did not differ between the groups (group mean ISQ values ranged from 23 to 35; χ(2) = 0.37). RFA was not repeated at sacrifice due to implant instability. Histomorphometric analysis showed % BIC was highest for control (34.8 ± 15.7), followed by Test 1 (29.6 ± 18.1) and Test 2 implants (23.3 ± 22.7), but this difference was not statistically significant (χ(2) = 0.3).
Early integration of RBM implants placed into thin maxillary sinus walls was not enhanced by hydrothermal anodization of implant surfaces. This may be related to the initial low stability of the implants and the relatively short healing period. However, non-anodized RBM surfaces showed promising results, with % BIC values comparable to the best estimates of other studies using sinus grafting. Whether the modification of the implant surfaces through anodization with simultaneous sinus grafting would promote enhanced early osseointegration, is a subject of future research.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2016.
All research outputs
#21,938,746
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Implants Research
#1,015
of 1,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#345,083
of 404,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Implants Research
#23
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,218 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 404,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
