ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2023
Effectiveness of Different Antimicrobial Agents on Malodor Prevention in Two-Stage Dental Implants: A Double-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOpening of a healing abutment in two-stage implant systems is usually followed by a bad smell. Previous studies have found that presence of bacteria in microleakages of the implant-abutment interface results in further malodor. However, studies focusing on preventive treatments for this issue are scarce. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two antimicrobial agents on prevention of malodor followed by opening the healing abutments. MATERIALS AND
methodsCurrent double-blinded randomized clinical trial was performed on 51 eligible patients who were referred for their exposure surgery. They were divided equally into three parallel groups. In two groups, either chlorhexidine or tetracycline was added to the internal surface of the fixtures before screwing the healing abutments. One group did not receive any intervention. Three to 4 weeks later malodor was scored by sniffing the healing abutments immediately after uncovering them (odorless = 0/odor = 1). The three groups were then compared regarding malodor scores.
resultsOur findings showed that malodor was more frequent in the control group (58.82%) in comparison with groups of intervention (17.65 and 23.53%). There was a statistically significant difference between malodor in patients in whom antimicrobial agents (chlorhexidine and tetracycline) were used in their implants and the control group (
conclusionBased upon the data from this study, it appears that local antimicrobial agents including chlorhexidine and tetracycline result in less malodor production within the implant-abutment interface. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A specific type of malodor is commonly seen after opening the healing abutment of a two-stage dental implant. Not only this issue is noticed by the dentist, but also annoyed the patient. Using local antimicrobial agents in the fixtures is likely to be a simple, easily applicable solution that satisfies both patients and dentists, and eliminates the possibility of further inflammation.
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.