Premium
Effect of biofilm formation on implant abutments with an anti‐bacterial coating: A pre‐clinical in vivo study
Author(s) -
Almohandes Ahmed,
Abrahamsson Ingemar,
Dahlén Gunnar,
Berglundh Tord
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.13745
Subject(s) - implant , dentistry , abutment , premolar , coating , materials science , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , ligature , titanium , in vivo , medicine , molar , surgery , biology , composite material , metallurgy , civil engineering , botany , engineering , genus , microbiology and biotechnology
Objectives To analyse the long‐term effect of plaque formation on implant abutments with an antibacterial coating and the ensuing host response in peri‐implant tissues. Materials and methods Four implants were installed in each mandibular premolar region following tooth extraction in six dogs. Three months later, two test abutments with a titanium–bismuth–gallium (Ti‐Bi‐Ga) coating and two control titanium abutments were connected to the implants on each side of the mandible. After 2 months, ligatures were placed around the implants in one side of the mandible and plaque formation was allowed until the end of the experiment. The ligatures were removed after 4 weeks. Radiographs and microbiological samples were obtained from each implant site during the plaque formation period. Biopsies were obtained 8 months after abutment connection and prepared for histological analysis. Results The analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences in bone loss, bacterial growth and size of inflammatory lesions between implant units with and without the Ti‐Bi‐Ga coating. Implant sites exposed to the short period of ligature‐induced breakdown demonstrated more pronounced bone loss and bacterial growth than non‐ligature sites. Conclusions It is suggested that a Ti‐Bi‐Ga coating does not prevent biofilm formation on the implant device and does not influence the ensuing host response in the adjacent peri‐implant mucosa.