ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2014
In vitro evaluation of leakage at implant-abutment connection of three implant systems having the same prosthetic interface using rhodamine B.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Micro-CT Evaluation of Microgaps at Implant-Abutment Connection.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Retentive Properties of Two Compatible Ball Attachments in Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures: An In Vitro Study.Journal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran) · 2018Article
- In Vitro Evaluation of Bacterial Leakage at Implant-Abutment Connection: An 11-Degree Morse Taper Compared to a Butt Joint Connection.International journal of biomaterials · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives. Hollow space between implant and abutment may act as reservoir for commensal and/or pathogenic bacteria representing a potential source of tissue inflammation. Microbial colonization of the interfacial gap may ultimately lead to infection and bone resorption. Using Rhodamine B, a sensitive fluorescent tracer dye, we aim in this study to investigate leakage at implant-abutment connection of three implant systems having the same prosthetic interface. Materials and Methods. Twenty-one implants (seven Astra Tech, seven Euroteknika, and seven Dentium) with the same prosthetic interface were connected to their original abutments, according to the manufacturers' recommendation. After determination of the inner volume of each implant systems, the kinetic quantification of leakage was evaluated for each group using Rhodamine B (10(-2) M). For each group, spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect leakage with a fluorescence spectrophotometer at 1 h (T0) and 48 h (T1) of incubation time at room temperature. Results. Astra Tech had the highest inner volume (6.8 μ L), compared to Dentium (4 μ L) and Euroteknika (2.9 μ L). At T0 and T1, respectively, the leakage volume and percentage of each system were as follows: Astra Tech 0.043 μ L or 1.48% (SD 0.0022), 0.08 μ L or 5.56% (SD 0.0074), Euroteknika 0.09 μ L or 6.93% (SD 0.0913), 0.21 μ L or 20.55% (SD 0.0035), and Dentium 0.07 μ L or 4.6% (SD 0.0029), 0.12 μ L or 10.47% (SD 0.0072). Conclusion. The tested internal conical implant-abutment connections appear to be unable to prevent leakage. In average, Astra Tech implants showed the highest inner volume and the least leakage.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.