Suggested guidelines for the topographic evaluation of implant surfaces.

By A. Wennerberg, T. Albrektsson. The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 2000

510 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

On implant surfaces: a review of current knowledge and opinions. (2010, background): “The aims of the present review are (1) to identify essential surface parameters; (2) to present an overview of surface characteristics at the micrometer and nanometer levels of resolution relevant for the four most popular oral implant systems; (3) to discuss potential advantages of nanoroughness, h”
Biomaterial strategies for engineering implants for enhanced osseointegration and bone repair (2015, background): “Roughness values of Ra around 1– 2 μm seem to be ideal for bone–implant interactions [47].”
Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: a systematic review. (2009, background): “Height parameters alone are by far the most quoted parameters, but a proper description of a surface minimally needs to include one height as well as at least one spatial or hybrid parameter, such as Sds% and Sdr (Wennerberg & Albrektsson 2000).”