Pharmacologic augmentation of implant fixation in osteopenic bone
Current Osteoporosis Reports, ISSN: 1544-2241, Vol: 12, Issue: 1, Page: 55-64
2014
- 16Citations
- 30Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations16
- Citation Indexes16
- 16
- CrossRef14
- Captures30
- Readers30
- 30
Review Description
Osteoporosis presents a challenge for successful implant fixation due to an impaired healing response. Preclinical studies have consistently reported reduced osseointegration capability in trabecular bone. Although clinical studies of implant success in dentistry have not found a negative effect due to osteoporosis, low bone mass is a significant risk factor for implant migration in orthopedics. Pharmacologic treatment options that limit bone resorption or upregulate formation have been studied preclinically. While, both treatment options improve implant fixation, direct comparisons to-date have found anti-catabolic more effective than anabolic treatments for establishing implant fixation, but combination approaches are better than either treatment alone. Clinically, anti-catabolic treatments, particularly bisphosphonates have been shown to increase the longevity of implants, while limited clinical evidence on the effects of anabolic treatment exists. Preclinical experiments are needed to determine the effects of osteoporosis and subsequent treatment on the long-term maintenance of fixation and recovery after bone loss. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84895930826&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11914-013-0182-z; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24293098; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11914-013-0182-z; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11914-013-0182-z; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11914-013-0182-z
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know