Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35818785›Full record

ArticleClinical oral implants research2022

Microleakage assessment of CAD-CAM Cobalt-Chrome and Zirconia abutments on a conical connection dental implant: A comparative in vitro study.

Pedro Molinero-Mourelle, Andrea Roccuzzo, Burak Yilmaz, Walter Yu Hang Lam, Edmond H N Pow, Jaime Del Río Highsmith, Miguel Gómez-Polo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Pedro Molinero-MourelleDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthetics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5493-0295
Andrea RoccuzzoDepartment of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8079-0860
Burak YilmazDepartment of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Walter Yu Hang LamProsthodontics, Restorative Dental Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.
Edmond H N PowProsthodontics, Restorative Dental Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2640-8437
Jaime Del Río HighsmithDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthetics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Miguel Gómez-PoloDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthetics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the marginal and bacterial microleakage in zirconia and CAD-CAM or cast Co-Cr implant abutments.

methodsSixty-four conical connection implants with their respective abutments were divided into four groups (Co-Cr (milled, laser-sintered, and cast) and Zirconia (milled)). All specimens were subjected to a chewing simulation and thermocycling. After aging process, specimens were submerged in a 0.2% methylene blue solution with Porphyromonas gingivalis (P.g) for 48 h. The marginal microleakage was measured using a 40× optical microscopy at the internal part of the implant, and when positive microleakage was observed, a DNA isolation with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was used. The microbiological assessment was based on colony forming units (CFUs).

resultsThirty (47%) implant-abutments presented microleakage and the PCR was performed on those specimens (1 Zirconia, 1 Co-Cr milled, 14 Co-Cr laser-sintered and 14 cast). Seven specimens (1 Co-Cr laser-sintered and six cast) presented values below the PCR detection limit (< 100 CFUs). The lowest CFUs count occurred in the Co-Cr milled group (5.17E+02 CFUs/ml) followed by zirconia (7.70E+03 CFUs/ml). The Co-Cr cast (9.39E+03 CFUs/ml) and laser-sintered (2.4E+05 CFUs/ml) groups had higher bacterial count. The CFU count comparison performed between Co-Cr cast and laser-sintered resulted in a statistically significant differences in favor of Co-CrCL (p < .05).

conclusionsThe abutment material and fabrication technique affected the implant-abutment microleakage. Although the CAD-CAM abutments presented favorable results, all tested groups presented microleakage.

Indexed as

Dental AbutmentsDental ImplantsCobaltComputer-Aided DesignDental Implant-Abutment DesignMaterials TestingTitaniumZirconiumCobaltDental ImplantsTitaniumZirconiumzirconium oxidedental implant abutment connectiondental implant abutment designdental implantsimplant supported dental prosthesismicroleakagepolymerase chain reaction

Identifiers

PMID35818785
PMCPMC9544167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.