ArticleClinical oral implants research2025
Evaluation of a Gel Loaded With M101 on Bone and Peri-Implantitis Healing: An Experimental In Vivo Study.
Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of M101 gel in bone and peri-implantitis healing and its safety of use. MATERIALS AND
methodsM101 gel and solution (1 g/L) were evaluated in four different models: (i) human osteoblast culture; (ii) mouse calvarial defect; (iii) extraction model in dogs; (iv) peri-implantitis model in dogs. M101 cytocompatibility was evaluated in osteoblasts, and expression of ALP, Runx2, and BMP-2 was determined. Calvarial defect was induced in mice by bone drilling, and healing was evaluated after 5 weeks. In dogs, peri-implantitis was treated by non-surgical and surgical approaches with or without M101 gel application. Analyses were performed after 2 months. Socket healing was evaluated by micro-CT after tooth extraction. Local and systemic responses were evaluated after gel administration and intravenous injection.
resultsThe cytocompatibility of M101 was confirmed in osteoblasts, and ALP, Runx2, and BMP-2 gene expression was increased after exposure (p < 0.05). In mice, calvarial bone defect healing was 1.6 folds more in the M101 gel treated group than in the untreated group (p < 0.001). In the extraction model, the local M101 gel application and systemic M101 administration did not induce an immunological response. In the peri-implantitis dog model, M101 gel as an adjuvant to non-surgical treatment led to improved PiPD reduction (p < 0.05) when compared to non-surgical treatment without M101 gel. No difference was observed when used as an adjunct to surgical treatment.
conclusionM101 may be a safe and interesting candidate as an adjuvant to improve bone healing and non-surgical treatment in peri-implantitis.
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.