Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36826175›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2023

Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment.

Taras V Furtsev, Anastasia A Koshmanova, Galina M Zeer, Elena D Nikolaeva, Ivan N Lapin, Tatiana N Zamay, Anna S Kichkailo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Taras V FurtsevDepartment of Orthopedic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University, 1 Partizana Zheleznyaka, Krasnoyarsk 660022, Russia.
Anastasia A KoshmanovaLaboratory for Biomolecular and Medical Technologies, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University, 1 Partizana Zheleznyaka, Krasnoyarsk 660022, Russia.ORCID 0000-0001-7339-8660
Galina M ZeerDepartment of Materials Science and Materials Processing Technology, Polytechnical Institute, Siberian Federal University, Pr. Svobodniy, 79, Krasnoyarsk 660041, Russia.
Elena D NikolaevaLaboratory for Biomolecular and Medical Technologies, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University, 1 Partizana Zheleznyaka, Krasnoyarsk 660022, Russia.
Ivan N LapinLaboratory of Advanced Materials and Technology, Siberian Physical Technical Institute, National Research Tomsk State University, Tomsk 634050, Russia.ORCID 0000-0001-5736-3791
Tatiana N ZamayDepartment of Orthopedic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University, 1 Partizana Zheleznyaka, Krasnoyarsk 660022, Russia.
Anna S KichkailoLaboratory for Biomolecular and Medical Technologies, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University, 1 Partizana Zheleznyaka, Krasnoyarsk 660022, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-1054-4629
Krasnoyarsk Scientific Center · RUKrasnoyarsk State Medical University · RUNational Research Tomsk State University · RUSiberian Federal University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dental implant therapy is a well-accepted treatment modality. Despite good predictability and success in the early stages, the risk of postplacement inflammation in the long-term periods remains an urgent problem. Surgical access and decontamination with chemical and mechanical methods are more effective than antibiotic therapy. The search for the optimal and predictable way for peri-implantitis treatment remains relevant. Here, we evaluated four cleaning methods for their ability to preserve the implant's surface for adequate mesenchymal stem cell adhesion and differentiation. Implants isolated after peri-implantitis were subjected to cleaning with diamond bur; Ti-Ni alloy brush, air-flow, or Er,Cr:YSGG laser and cocultured with mice MSC for five weeks. Dental bur and titanium brushes destroyed the implants' surfaces and prevented MSC attachment. Air-flow and laser minimally affected the dental implant surface microroughness, which was initially designed for good cell adhesion and bone remodeling and to provide full microbial decontamination. Anodized with titanium dioxide and sandblasted with aluminum oxide, acid-etched implants appeared to be better for laser treatment. In implants sandblasted with aluminum oxide, an acid-etched surface better preserves its topology when treated with the air-flow. These cleaning methods minimally affect the implant's surface, so it maintains the capability to absorb osteogenic cells for further division and differentiation.

Indexed as

adhesiondental implantslasermesenchymal stem cellsperi-implantitistitanium brush

Identifiers

PMID36826175
PMCPMC9956030
OpenAlexW4317931832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.