{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03193916349809886, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0022813688212927757, 'mean_word_length': 5.646464646464646, '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}}
Subcutaneous tissue response to titanium, poly(ε-caprolactone), and carbonate-substituted hydroxyapatite-coated poly(ε-caprolactone) plates: a rabbit study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the soft tissue response to poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) implants with and without carbonate-substituted hydroxyapatite (CHA) coating compared to the commonly used titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V)-machined surface. Experimental materials were implanted subcutaneously in New Zealand white rabbits for 5 weeks. The tissue attachment strength, as evaluated by a tissue peel test, histological and histomorphology analysis, as well as scanning electron microscopy were compared between groups. The peel test result revealed no statistically significant difference between groups. Histological analysis found fibrous capsule formation around all implant materials. The fibrous capsule around PCL implants with and without CHA coating was significantly thinner compared with the capsule thickness around the titanium implants. However, the inflammatory cells, as present at the fibrous capsule-implant interface, were found to be significantly lower in the Ti-group. In conclusion, the current data do not prove that PCL or PCL with a CHA coating results in a superior soft tissue response compared with a machined titanium implant.