{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0191415313225058, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004060324825986079, 'mean_word_length': 5.436567164179104, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
In vivo comparison of bone formation on titanium implant surfaces coated with biomimetically deposited calcium phosphate or electrochemically deposited hydroxyapatite.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare bone formation on titanium implant surfaces coated with biomimetically deposited calcium phosphate (BDCaP) or electrochemically deposited hydroxyapatite (EDHA).


MATERIALS AND METHODS
The implants were separated into three groups: a control group, a BDCaP group, and an EDHA group. Surface analysis was performed by field-emission scanning electron microscopy, x-ray diffractometry, and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Implants were inserted in a randomized arrangement into rabbit tibiae. After 2, 4, and 8 weeks, the tibiae were retrieved and prepared for histomorphometric evaluation.


RESULTS
Field-emission scanning electron microscopy showed that the BDCaP crystals were flakelike and the EDHA crystals were rodlike with a hexagonal cross section. X-ray diffractometric patterns and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy spectra showed that the BDCaP coating consisted of HA and octacalcium phosphate, whereas the EDHA coating consisted of HA. Histologic observation showed that new bone on the EDHA-coated implant became mature after 4 weeks, while new bone on the control and BDCaP-coated implants was mature after 8 weeks. The EDHA implant showed significantly greater BIC and bone area compared to the control and BDCaP implants during 4 to 8 weeks. The BDCaP coating failed to show increased bone formation during the test period.


CONCLUSION
The present EDHA coating has good bone formation properties, while the BDCaP coating has weaker bone formation properties.