Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30232627›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2019

Clinical evaluation of non-surgical cleaning modalities on titanium dental implants during maintenance care: a 1-year follow-up on prosthodontic superstructures.

Kristina Emily Schmidt, Thorsten Mathias Auschill, Anton Sculean, Nicole Birgit Arweiler

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Microbial Biofilm Decontamination on Dental Implant Surfaces: A Mini Review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kristina Emily SchmidtDepartment of Periodontology, Philipps-University Marburg, Georg-Voigt-Strasse 3, 35039, Marburg, Germany.
Thorsten Mathias AuschillDepartment of Periodontology, Philipps-University Marburg, Georg-Voigt-Strasse 3, 35039, Marburg, Germany.
Anton SculeanDepartment of Periodontology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Nicole Birgit ArweilerDepartment of Periodontology, Philipps-University Marburg, Georg-Voigt-Strasse 3, 35039, Marburg, Germany. arweiler@med.uni-marburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1453-0697

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate tissue health around implants with newly attached superstructures over 12 months of preventive maintenance appointments and instrumentation when necessary. MATERIAL AND

methodsIn a randomized, split-mouth study 32 implants (8 participants with 4 implants each) received followed-up care every 3 months after superstructure attachment. Implants and superstructures were randomly assigned to four treatment groups and treated if necessary: (1) titanium curettes (TC), (2) stainless steel ultrasonic tip (PS), (3) erythritol air-polishing powder (EP), or (4) rubber cup polishing (CON). Probing depths (PDs), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified gingival (mucosal) bleeding index (GBI) around implants, and full-mouth Plaque Control Record (PCR) were measured every 3 months. Clinical attachment levels (CALs) and height of keratinized mucosa (KM)/gingival margins (GMs) for implants/teeth and PD, BOP, and GBI for teeth were documented at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Matrix metalloproteinase 8 (MMP-8) and periopathogens were measured at baseline and 12 months.

resultsParticipants exhibited minimal signs of periodontal inflammation with statistically significant PD improvement (3.0 ± 0.2 to 2.8 ± 0.3 mm; p = 0.022) and overall CAL (4.3 ± 0.8 to 4.0 ± 0.7 mm; p = 0.048) after 1 year. Implants showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between or within groups at baseline or 12 months for any parameter, except MMP-8 decreased significantly for PS (14.50 ± 17.58 to 4.63 ± 7.56 ng; p = 0.044), and after 12 months, PCR showed a significant difference between TC and PS (p = 0.018).

conclusionsTreatment was necessary as inflammation was observed around newly placed superstructures within the first year of maintenance care. All tested treatment modalities yielded comparable clinical improvements. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Early assessment and diagnosis of mucositis and regular maintenance can promote long-lasting implant health.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsTitaniumAgedDental Plaque IndexDental PolishingDental ProphylaxisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMucositisPeriodontal IndexProsthodonticsDental ImplantsTitaniumBiocompatibilityIndividualized careMaintenanceOral hygieneTitanium dental implants

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.