Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:11145355rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0034693lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0262950lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0391978lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0392918lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0021102lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0220825lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0205148lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1522605lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:issue11lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:dateCreated2000-12-28lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:abstractTextBiomechanical and biological factors can co-dependently influence the establishment of implant-tissue integration; thus, concurrent evaluation of these factors should provide a better understanding of osseointegration. This study aimed to establish and validate an in vivo rat model frequently used in molecular/cellular biology for implant biomechanical studies. We tested the hypotheses that the implant push-in test assesses the degree of osseointegration by the breakpoint load at the implant-tissue interface and that it sensitively differentiates between the effects of different implant surface topographies. The implant push-in test, which produces a consistent load-displacement measurement, was used to test miniature cylindrical titanium implants placed at the distal edge of the adult rat femur. The push-in test values obtained at each post-implantation healing point (weeks 0, 2, 4, and 8) significantly increased in a time-dependent manner. The implant surface after the push-in test was associated with remnant tissues containing host-derived elements, such as calcium, phosphate, and sulfate. In this model, acid-etched implants (average roughness, 0.159 microm) showed significantly greater push-in test values than did turned implants (average roughness, 0.063 microm) throughout the experimental period (p < 0.0001). These results support the validity of the push-in test in rats, which may be used as a rapid and sensitive biomechanical assay system for implant osseointegration research.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:commentsCorrectionshttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:citationSubsetDlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:monthNovlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:issn0022-0345lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:OgawaTTlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:OzawaSSlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:YangJ MJMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:NishimureMMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:RyuK HKHlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:ShihJ HJHlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorpubmed-author:SukotjoCClld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:volume79lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:pagination1857-63lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:11145355...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:year2000lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:articleTitleBiomechanical evaluation of osseous implants having different surface topographies in rats.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:affiliationThe Jane and Jerry Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Advanced Prosthodontics, Biomaterials and Hospital Dentistry, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1668, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:11145355pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:11145355lld:pubmed