ArticleBMC oral health2023
Biocompatibility and biofilm formation on conventional and CAD/CAM provisional implant restorations.
Article in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Microbiological behavior of 3D printing materials for indirect restorations: A scoping review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Systematic Review of the Quality of Stereolithographic Three-Dimensionally Printed Materials for Provisional Dental Restorations.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Next-Generation Dental Materials: Exploring Bacterial Biofilm Formation on 3D-Printable Resin-Based Composites.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Shear Bond Strength of Silane-Containing Universal Adhesives in Repairing Aged 3D-Printed Provisional Restorations With Flowable Composite: An In Vitro Study.International journal of dentistry · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental implant treatment is a complex and sophisticated process, and implant provisional restorations play a vital role in ensuring its success. The advent of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology has revolutionized the field of implant restorations by providing improved precision leading to a reduction in chair time and more predictable treatment outcomes. This technology offers a promising solution to the drawbacks of conventional methods and has the potential to transform the way implant procedures are approached. Despite the clear advantages of CAD/CAM over conventional provisional implant restorations including higher accuracy of fit and superior mechanical properties, little research has been conducted on the biological aspect of these novel restorations. This study aims to fill that gap, comprehensively assessing the biocompatibility, gingival tissue attachment and biofilm formation of a range of provisional implant restorations using CAD/CAM technology through milling and 3-D printing processes compared to conventional fabrication. The biocompatibility of the tested restorations was assessed by MTT assay, Calcein-AM assay as well as SEM analysis. The surface roughness of the tested samples was evaluated, alongside the attachment of Human Gingival Fibroblasts (HGF) cells as well as biofilm formation, and estimated Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) cell count from DNA detection.The results showed all tested provisional implant restorations were non-toxic and good HGF cell attachment but differed in their quantity of biofilm formation, with surface texture influenced by the material and fabrication technique, playing a role. Within the limitation of this study, the findings suggest that CAD/CAM-fabricated provisional implant restorations using a milling technique may be the most favourable among tested groups in terms of biocompatibility and periodontal-related biofilm formation.
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.