ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Bacterial Growth on Three Non-Resorbable Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Membranes-An In Vitro Study.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Appraising and comparing the role of autogenous periosteal graft as a barrier membrane in the treatment of intrabony defects in chronic periodontitis cases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of medical sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Contamination potential of non-resorbable membranes intended for exposure in the oral cavity during regenerative procedures - In vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Photodynamic inactivation of bacterial biofilms on absorbable collagen membranes using indocyanine green in aqueous and hydrogen peroxide solutions.Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
- In Vitro Microbial Adhesion on the Surfaces of Various Polytetrafluoroethylene Membranes Used in Guided Bone Regeneration.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Biomaterials for Guided Tissue Regeneration and Guided Bone Regeneration: A Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- The Microbial Diversity and Biofilm Characteristics of d-PTFE Membranes Used for Socket Preservation: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- A Novel Device for the Evaluation of In Vitro Bacterial Colonization in Membranes for Guided Tissue and Bone Regeneration.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- The Role of Guided Bone Regeneration in Enhancing Dental Implant Success : Guided Bone Regeneration in Dental Implant.Galen medical journal · 2024Review
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
GBR (Guided Bone Regeneration) procedure is challenged by the risk of membrane exposure to the oral cavity and contamination. The barrier quality of these membranes serve as a mechanical block from bacterial penetration into the GBR site. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the antibacterial effect of three commercial non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene membranes. (Two d-PTFE membranes and one double layer e-PTFE +d-PTFE membrane). A validated in vitro model with two bacterial species (Streptococcus sanguinis and Fusobacterium nucleatum) was used. Eight samples from membrane each were placed in a 96-well microtiter plate. The experimental and positive control groups were exposed to a bacterial suspension which involved one bacterial species in each plate. Bacterial growth was monitored spectrophotometrically at 650 nm for 24 h in temperature controlled microplate spectrophotometer under anaerobic conditions. One- Sample Kolmogorov−Smirnov Normal test and the Kruskal−Wallis test was used for the statistical analysis. As shown by the bacterial growth curves obtained from the spectrophotometer readings, all three membranes resulted in bacterial growth. We have not found a statistical difference in F. nucleatum growth between different membrane samples and the positive control group. However, S. sanguinis growth was reduced significantly in the presence of two membranes (CYTOPLAST TXT-200 and NeoGenTM) when compared to the control (p < 0.01). The presence of Permamem® had no significant influence on S. sanguinis growth. Some types of commercial non-resorbable PTFE membranes may have an impact on the growth dynamics of specific bacterial species.
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.