ArticleClinical oral investigations2021
Mammalian cell response and bacterial adhesion on titanium healing abutments: effect of multiple implantation and sterilization cycles.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of sodium hypochlorite and ethyl alcohol and mechanical cleaning aid in cleaning used healing abutments: A cross-sectional study.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society · 2026Article
- Reuse of healing abutments: Ethical, biological and professional training implications.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMultiple implantations of the implant healing abutment (IHA) could adversely impact its surface properties in vivo. Furthermore, the effect of sterilization and reuse of the IHA on soft tissue viability and bacterial contamination has not been extensively studied. The goal of this study was to perform an in vitro analysis of mammalian cell viability and bacterial adhesion on the surfaces of retrieved IHA after single and multiple implantations and repetitive cycles of sterilization. MATERIALS AND
methodsIHA surface morphology was studied using optical microscopy. Cell viability of gingival fibroblasts (HGF-1) and oral keratinocytes (HOKg) in indirect contact with IHAs was assessed for 3 and 7 days. Immersion in bacterial culture was performed with a polyculture of Streptococcus species for 3 days and Streptococcus species with Fusobacterium nucleatum for 7 days.
resultsIHAs exhibited signs of surface damage even after a single exposure to the oral cavity. Fibroblasts did not show a significant preference towards control IHAs over used IHAs, whereas keratinocytes exhibited a significant decrease in viability when exposed to IHAs after multiple implantation cycles as compared with controls. Adherent bacterial count increased with increasing number of IHA implantations for both polycultures.
conclusionsReusing of IHAs in vivo promoted surface degradation in addition to adversely impacting host cell viability and oral bacterial attachment in vitro. These findings show IHA reuse might potentially affect its clinical performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Careful consideration should be taken when reusing IHAs in patients because this practice can result in permanent surface changes that might affect soft tissue integration during the healing period and promote bacterial colonization.
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.