Different sealing materials preventing the microbial leakage into the screw‐retained implant restorations: an in vitro analysis by DNA c heckerboard hybridization

Abstract Objectives The aim of this controlled in vitro study was to identify and quantify up to 38 microbial species penetrating through the screw‐retained implant prostheses with different sealing materials. Material and methods Sixty morse cone implants were restored with single‐unit screw‐retain...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical oral implants research 2017-02, Vol.28 (2), p.242-250
Main Authors: do Nascimento, Cássio, Pita, Murillo Sucena, Calefi, Paulo Linares, de Oliveira Silva, Thalisson Saymo, dos Santos, Juliane Bustamante Sá, Pedrazzi, Vinícius
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objectives The aim of this controlled in vitro study was to identify and quantify up to 38 microbial species penetrating through the screw‐retained implant prostheses with different sealing materials. Material and methods Sixty morse cone implants were restored with single‐unit screw‐retained prostheses. All the components were randomly divided into five groups ( n  = 12) according to the proposed materials: (1) polytetrafluoroethylene tape+composite resin; (2) polytetrafluoroethylene tape+gutta‐percha; (3) polytetrafluoroethylene tape+light‐polymerized provisional composite; (4) cotton pellet+gutta‐percha; and (5) cotton pellet+light‐polymerized provisional composite. Human saliva was used as contaminant media, and DNA checkerboard hybridization was used to identify and quantify microbial species. Results Microbial leakage was observed in all groups: M. salivarium , S. pasteuri , P. nigrescens , and P. melaninogenica were the species presenting the highest values of genome count, prevalence, and proportion within the groups. The total microbial mean counts (×10 5 , ± SD ) were as follows: Group 1 (2.81 ± 0.38), Group 2 (3.41 ± 0.38), Group 3 (6.02 ± 1.48), Group 4 (6.40 ± 1.42), and Group 5 (17.45 ± 1.67). Group 5 showed the higher microbial counts ( P  
ISSN:0905-7161
1600-0501
DOI:10.1111/clr.12790