↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

The effects of hierarchical micro/nanosurfaces decorated with TiO2 nanotubes on the bioactivity of titanium implants in vitro and in vivo

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
The effects of hierarchical micro/nanosurfaces decorated with TiO2 nanotubes on the bioactivity of titanium implants in vitro and in vivo
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s87347
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lei Zhou, Xianglong Ding, Jingxu Wang, Qingxia Zhao, Xi Lin, Yan Gao, Shaobing Li, Jingyi Wu, Mingdeng Rong, Zehong Guo, Chunhua Lai, Haibin Lu, Fang Jia

Abstract

In the present work, a hierarchical hybrid micro/nanostructured titanium surface was obtained by sandblasting with large grit and acid etching (SLA), and nanotubes of different diameters (30 nm, 50 nm, and 80 nm) were superimposed by anodization. The effect of each SLA-treated surface decorated with nanotubes (SLA + 30 nm, SLA + 50 nm, and SLA + 80 nm) on osteogenesis was studied in vitro and in vivo. The human MG63 osteosarcoma cell line was used for cytocompatibility evaluation, which showed that cell adhesion and proliferation were dramatically enhanced on SLA + 30 nm. In comparison with cells grown on the other tested surfaces, those grown on SLA + 80 nm showed an enhanced expression of osteogenesis-related genes. Cell spread was also enhanced on SLA + 80 nm. A canine model was used for in vivo evaluation of bone bonding. Histological examination demonstrated that new bone was formed more rapidly on SLA-treated surfaces with nanotubes (especially SLA + 80 nm) than on those without nanotubes. All of these results indicate that SLA + 80 nm is favorable for promoting the activity of osteoblasts and early bone bonding.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 15%
Student > Postgraduate 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Materials Science 5 15%
Unspecified 4 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 10 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 November 2015.
All research outputs
#14,828,066
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,858
of 3,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,278
of 284,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#70
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,817 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 284,444 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.