ArticleClinical oral investigations2016
In vitro analysis of the microbiological sealing of tapered implants after mechanical cycling.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06156111 (Bacterial Microleakage and Bone Loss in Internal Connection Dental Implants Based on the Type of Abutment Used in Zirconia Partial Fixed Prosthesis), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
Bacterial Microleakage and Bone Loss in Internal Connection Dental Implants Based on the Type of Abutment Used in Zirconia Partial Fixed Prosthesis: in Vivo Study
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Non-Engaging Abutment and Screw in Internal Implant Systems: Comparative Fatigue and Load Testing.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Review
- Accuracy of fit for cobaltchromium bar over two implants fabricated with different manufacturing techniques: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Micro-CT Evaluation of Microgaps at Implant-Abutment Connection.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Bacterial infiltration and detorque at the implant abutment morse taper interface after masticatory simulation.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Evaluation of sealing efficacy and removal convenience of sealing materials for implant abutment screw access holes.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Bacterial Microleakage at the Implant-Abutment Interface: An In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Bacterial translocation and microgap formation at a novel conical indexed implant abutment system for single crowns.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Article
- The efficacy of convenient cleaning methods applicable for customized abutments: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2021Article
- Microleakage at the Different Implant Abutment Interface: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2017Review
- Microbiological Sealing Analysis of a Tapered Connection and External Hexagon System.International journal of dentistry · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior and bacterial microleakage at the implant/abutment-tapered interface following mechanical cycling. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo groups of screwless (Morse taper) implants (G1 and G2) and two groups of prosthetic screwed implants (G3 and G4) were tested. One group from each model (G2 and G4) were submitted to mechanical cycling, 500,000 cycles per sample, at a load of 120 N at 2 Hz prior to analysis. Microbiological analysis was performed via immersion of all samples in an Escherichia coli-containing suspension, incubated at 37 °C. After 14 days, the abutments were removed from their respective implants, registering the removal force (G1 and G2) or reverse torque (G3 and G4), and the presence of bacterial leakage was evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed to analyze the tapered surfaces of the selected samples. The Student t, binomial, and G tests were used for statistical analysis at a 5 % significance level.
resultsThe results showed no significant difference between removal force, reverse torque, and contamination values when comparing implants of the same type. However, when the four groups were compared, contamination differed significantly (p = 0.044), with G1 having the least number of contaminated samples (8.3 %). SEM analysis showed superficial defects and damage.
conclusionsThe abutment removal force or torque was not affected by mechanical cycling. Bacterial sealing of the implant/abutment tapered interface was not effective for any condition analyzed. Imprecise machining of implant parts does not allow a sufficient contact area between surfaces to provide effective sealing and prevent bacterial leakage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The microscopic gap caused by unsatisfactory implant/abutment adaptation, surface irregularities, and plastic deformation of all parts enabled bacterial contamination of the oral implants.
Indexed as
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.