ReviewJournal of dental research2018
The Impact of Incorporating Antimicrobials into Implant Surfaces.
Review in Journal of dental research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Development of a New Bioadhesive Gel in the Prevention of Bacterial Biofilms on Dental Implants: An In Vitro Study.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
- Biomimetic Surface Engineering Strategies for Enhanced Osseointegration and Peri-Implant Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Antibacterial performance of biomimetic hydroxyapatite-functionalized titanium surfaces againstFrontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation on surface nanohardness, surface microhardness, surface roughness, and wettability of plant-based organic nanoparticle reinforced polyetheretherketone as an implant material - An in vitro study.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society · 2024Article
- Article
- Biomimetic Coatings in Implant Dentistry: A Quick Update.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Review
- Antibacterial activity and biocompatibility of silver coating via aerosol deposition on titanium and zirconia surfaces.International journal of implant dentistry · 2023Article
- Bacterial Adhesion of TESPSA and Citric Acid on Different Titanium Surfaces Substrate Roughness: An In Vitro Study with a Multispecies Oral Biofilm Model.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- In Vivo Biofilm Formation on Novel PEEK, Titanium, and Zirconia Implant Abutment Materials.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Biocompatible Nanostructured Silver-Incorporated Implant Surfaces Show Effective Antibacterial, Osteogenic, and Anti-Inflammatory Effects in vitro and in Rat Model.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Article
- A homogeneous dopamine-silver nanocomposite coating: striking a balance between the antibacterial ability and cytocompatibility of dental implants.Regenerative biomaterials · 2023Article
- Genetic Identification of Methicillin-ResistantInternational journal of microbiology · 2023Article
- Surface Modifications of High-Performance Polymer Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) to Improve Its Biological Performance in Dentistry.Polymers · 2022Review
- Why Is Tantalum Less Susceptible to Bacterial Infection?Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Article
- [Chlorhexidine-grafted phenolamine coating to improve antibacterial property of the titanium surface].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022Article
- A novel chlorhexidine-hexametaphosphate coating for titanium with antibiofilm efficacy and stem cell cytocompatibility.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2021Article
- A Bacteria and Cell Repellent Zwitterionic Polymer Coating on Titanium Base Substrates towards Smart Implant Devices.Polymers · 2021Article
- Recent Advances in the Development of Antimicrobial and Antifouling Biocompatible Materials for Dental Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
With the increase in numbers of joint replacements, spinal surgeries, and dental implantations, there is an urgent need to combat implant-associated infection. In addition to stringent sterile techniques, an efficacious way to prevent this destructive complication is to create new implants with antimicrobial properties. Specifically, these implants must be active in the dental implant environment where the implant is bathed in the glycoprotein-rich salivary fluids that enhance bacterial adhesion, and propagation, and biofilm formation. However, in designing an antimicrobial surface, a balance must be struck between antimicrobial activity and the need for the implant to interact with the bone environment. Three types of surfaces have been designed to combat biofilm formation, while attempting to maintain osseous interactions: 1) structured surfaces where topography, usually at the nanoscale, decreases bacterial adhesion sufficiently to retard establishment of infection; 2) surfaces that actively elute antimicrobials to avert bacterial adhesion and promote killing; and 3) surfaces containing permanently bonded agents that generate antimicrobial surfaces that prevent long-term bacterial adhesion. Both topographical and elution surfaces exhibit varying, albeit limited, antimicrobial activity in vitro. With respect to covalent coupling, we present studies on the ability of the permanent antimicrobial surfaces to kill organisms while fostering osseointegration. All approaches have significant drawbacks with respect to stability and efficacy, but the permanent surfaces may have an edge in creating a long-term antibacterial environment.
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.