An Evaluation of microbial leakage in three different implant abutment connections using a quantitative analysis of presence of staphylococci bacteria an in vitro study

  • Authors

    • Pranav Desai Bharati Vidyapeeth Dental College and Hospital, Pune
    2024-07-28
    https://doi.org/10.14419/4qk6xz86
  • Use about five key words or phrases in alphabetical order, Separated by Semicolon.

  • Abstract

    Dental implants have become a mainstay in providing fixed/semi fixed restorations successfully in the past few decades. One crucial component of dental implant which immensely contributes to the osseointegration and long term success of the restoration is the implant abutment connection (IAC). The IAC houses a microgap that can cause leakage of microorganisms which would then act as a bacterial reservoir.

    We performed a laboratory study to evaluate the microbial leakage occurring within the IAC between three different popularly used implants. The samples were divided into three groups based on their IAC – Conelog connection (Biohorizon), Conexa connection (B and B) and Internal Octagon (Osstem). The implant analog – abutment assemblies to be studied were immersed in a peptone broth containing Staphylococci bacteria. After an incubation period of 14 days, these assemblies were disassembled and a swab was taken from the inner surface of the implant analog and abutment. This swab was plated and after 48 hours, colonies of Staphylococci were counted. From the study, it was clear that microbial leakage had taken place in all the groups.

    This will help us to guide the decision of which is the most suitable implant to be used to provide a successful long term prosthesis to the patient.

  • References

    1. Cho JH, Chang SA, Kwon HS, Choi YH, KoSH, Moon SD, Yoo SJ, Song KH, Son HS, Kim HS, Lee WC, Cha BY, Son HY & Yoon KH (2006), Long-term effect of the internet-based glucose monitoring system on HbA1c Reduction and glucose stability: a 30-month fol-low-up study for diabetes management with a ubiquitous medical care system. Diabetes Care 29, 2625–2631. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc05-2371.
    2. Fauci AS, Braunwald E, Kasper DL & Hauser SL (2008), Principles of Harrison’s Internal Medicine, Vol. 9, 17thedn. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp.2275–2304.
    3. Kim HS & Jeong HS (2007), A nurse short message service by cellular phone in type-2 diabetic patients for six months. Journal of Clinical Nursing 16, 1082–1087. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.01698.x.
    4. Lee JR, Kim SA, Yoo JW & Kang YK (2007), The present status of diabetes education and the role recognition as a diabetes educator of nurses in korea. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 77, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2007.01.057.
    5. McMahon GT, Gomes HE, Hohne SH, Hu TM, Levine BA & Conlin PR (2005), Web-based care management in patients with poorly controlled diabetes. Diabetes Care 28, 1624–1629. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.7.1624.
    6. Thakurdesai PA, Kole PL & Pareek RP (2004), Evaluation of the quality and contents of diabetes mellitus patient education on Internet. Patient Education and Counseling 53, 309–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2003.04.001.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Desai, P. (2024). An Evaluation of microbial leakage in three different implant abutment connections using a quantitative analysis of presence of staphylococci bacteria an in vitro study. International Journal of Health, 11(1), 11-19. https://doi.org/10.14419/4qk6xz86