ArticleScientific reports2024
A microtomographic and histopathological evaluation of dental cements as late-stage peri-implant complication in a rat model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dental Luting Cements and Peri-Implantitis: Molecular Mechanisms, Clinical Implications and the Role of Autophagy and Nanotechnology-A Narrative Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Influence of cement composition and scaler selection on dental cement removal and surface damage.Odontology · 2026Article
- Preclinical Rat Models in Oral Implant Dentistry: A Scoping Review of Study Design and Experimental Practices.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Advances in Periodontal Therapy: A Comprehensive Review ofCurrent drug discovery technologies · 2026Review
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
Cement mediated peri-implantitis accounts for 1.9-75% of dental implant failures associated with peri-implant diseases. This study evaluated the biological impact of dental cements on osseointegrated implants using Lewis rats. Twenty-two rats were distributed into 6 groups: negative control (NC) soft diet (SD), and hard diet (HD); positive control SD and HD (n = 3); Implant + bio-ceramic Cement (BC) SD and HD which included contralateral Sham sites (n = 5). Titanium implants were placed on either side of the maxillae and allowed to heal for 14 days. Later, both sides of experimental groups underwent a re-entry surgery to simulate clinical cementation. The right side received 0.60 mg of BC. At 14 days post cement application, maxillae were harvested for clinical, microtomographic, and histological evaluations. Clinical and microtomographic evaluations indicated evidence of extensive inflammation and circumferential bone resorption around BC implants in comparison to NC. Histology revealed cement particles surrounded by inflammatory infiltrate in the implant area accompanied by biofilm for SD groups. Both sides of BC indicated intensive bone resorption accompanied by signs of osteolysis when compared to NC. Cemented groups depicted significantly lower bone to implant contact when compared to NC. In conclusion, residual cement extravasation negatively impacted osseointegrated implants after re-entry surgeries.
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.