ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2021
A micromorphological/microbiological pilot study assessing three methods for the maintenance of the implant patient.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of a new magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler and a traditional piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler on root surfaces and patient complaints.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Immediate Loaded Full-Arch Mandibular Rehabilitations in Younger vs. Elderly Patients: A Comparative Retrospective Study with 7-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Marginal Bone Loss Compared in Internal and External Implant Connections: Retrospective Clinical Study at 6-Years Follow-Up.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Efficacy Ozone Therapy in Reducing Periodontal Disease.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Aesthetic Restorations: The Role of The Dental Hygienist in Professional Maintenance: In Vitro Microbiological Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Full Arch Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation in Patients with Type I Diabetes Mellitus: Retrospective Clinical Study with 10 Year Follow-Up.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A micromorphological/microbiological pilot study assessing three methods for the maintenance of the implant patient.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of the ultrasonic piezoelectric inserts of EMS Steel Tip A, EMS Peek, and IS-TiP-STS-3E MATERIALS AND
methodsThirteen implants were examined (Winsix, Biosafin, Ancona, Italy). The implants were divided into five groups and analyzed with a SEM microscope and microbiological analysis to evaluate the possible modification of structure and the bacterial load reduction.
resultsThe control and A, B, and C test groups were initially contaminated in vitro with Streptococcus mutans. Subsequently, the A, B, and C test groups were treated by an only expert operator in standard conditions. Test groups A, B, and C were inoculated for 3 hr and, furthermore, microbiologically analyzed.
conclusionThe gold standard of an implant maintenance is a significant reduction of the bacterial load without becoming aggressive. According to our results, despite the limitations of the study, the authors recommend the least aggressive IS-TiP-STS-3E
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.