Bacterial Microleakage at the Implant-Abutment Interface: An In Vitro Study

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate, in vitro, the microleakage of bacteria of 3 different implant connections for a period of 14 days. 60 dental implants (AoN) (n = 20) were distinguished into three groups, accordingly to the type of connection: External Hexagon (EH), Internal Hexagon (IH), and Cone Morse (CM) connection. All implants were inserted and fixed on sterile special vinyl support. Ten fixtures for each group were inoculated in the internal platform with 1.0 μL of Streptococcus oralis (SO) and the other ten with the same amount of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA). The penetration of bacterial suspension into the surrounding solution was determined by the observation of the turbidity of the broth. Five implants for each sub-group were randomly observed at SEM, to verify the correct fitting of the abutments. Considering the total of the samples analyzed, CM showed significantly lower bacterial contamination, with respect to IH. In particular, bacterial contamination was found in 45%, 55%, and 20% of EH, IH, and CM, respectively. Analyzing results for the type of inoculated bacteria, P. aeruginosa showed a higher ability to contaminate all the connections, with respect to S. oralis.

Case Report of a Dental Implant with Conometric Abutment–Prosthetic Cap Connection: Advanced High-Resolution Imaging and Peri-Implant Connective Tissue Performance

“…This is in agreement with previous studies [7,8]; indeed, the few studies that have reported on bacterial contamination at the abutment-prosthesis coupling level demonstrate either an absence of a complete bacterial seal or no bacterial infiltration into and from this coupling. One of these studies reported an in vitro investigation of the microleakage of bacteria in three different implant connections for a period of 14 days [36]; in this case, 60 dental implants were distinguished into three groups, according to the type of connection: external hexagon, internal hexagon, and conometric connection. All implants were immersed in a bacterial suspension into the surrounding solution.…”

Anticorrosion and Antimicrobial Tannic Acid-Functionalized Ti-Metallic Glass Ribbons for Dental Abutment

“…Two-piece dental implants, consisting of an implant body and a transmucosal part (abutment) that the dental crown is mounted on, are widely used for dental restoration due to their flexibility in prosthetic angle, based on the abutment selected (angled or straight) . However, a disadvantage to the two-piece dental implant can be the existence of poor sealing along the implant body-abutment interface, providing a potential site for colonization of bacterial pathogens consisting of oral pathogens like Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, or other pathogens, for example, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa transferred from anterior nares or skin. , The literature has reported the migration of bacteria into the internal part of the bone implant through such a microgap and micromovement of the implant-abutment, causing interference with the health of the preimplant tissue, inflammation, and bone loss. , To avoid dental implant loss due to infection and inflammation response, some antibiotics like prophylaxis were prescribed to a patient immediately after dental surgery or amoxicillin 1 h before dental surgery. , Therefore, the development of new biomaterials without containing any toxic ions and modifying their surface properties can prevent an increased number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria due to the routine consumption of antibiotics before or after surgery. Sarac et al demonstrated that titanium-based metallic glasses (MGs) outperform the gold-standard Ti–6Al–4V when used as dental implants. , Yet, the development of titanium-based metallic glasses devoid of potentially toxic metals is imperative to mitigate any potential inflammatory reactions within the body .…”

“… 8 , 9 The literature has reported the migration of bacteria into the internal part of the bone implant through such a microgap and micromovement of the implant-abutment, causing interference with the health of the preimplant tissue, inflammation, and bone loss. 10 , 11 To avoid dental implant loss due to infection and inflammation response, some antibiotics like prophylaxis were prescribed to a patient immediately after dental surgery or amoxicillin 1 h before dental surgery. 12 , 13 Therefore, the development of new biomaterials without containing any toxic ions and modifying their surface properties can prevent an increased number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria due to the routine consumption of antibiotics before or after surgery.…”

Marginal Bone Loss Compared in Internal and External Implant Connections: Retrospective Clinical Study at 6-Years Follow-Up

“…As lateral forces are transmitted at the contact point between the implant and abutment, the risk of loosening and screw breakage is increased by generating micromovements that induce bone remodeling [29][30][31]. In addition, the presence of gaps on the implant-abutment surface can cause microleakage and bacterial accumulation, which can compromise the dental implant success [32][33][34][35][36][37].…”