Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 161

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bacterial adhesion on the titanium and zirconia abutment surfaces

Nascimento, Cássio do, Pita, Murillo Sucena, Fernandes, Flávio Henrique Nogueira Carriço, Pedrazzi, Vinícius, de Albuquerque Junior, Rubens Ferreira, Ribeiro, Ricardo Faria·2014·Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract

Objective: Microorganisms harboring the oral cavity, mainly those related to periodontal diseases, are the most potential etiologic factor of failure in long‐term implant treatment. The material used for abutment components may influence the adhesion and colonization of microbial species. The aim of this in vivo investigation was to evaluate the biofilm formation on machined (MPT) or cast titanium (CPT) and zirconia abutments (Zc). Methods: Six healthy subjects were enrolled in this randomized crossover clinical investigation. The study was conducted in three phases according to abutment surface evaluated. Each subject used an individual oral splint containing four disks of the same tested substrate, two located in the anterior and two in the posterior region, totalizing 12 specimens for subject. Participants were asked to use the removable intraoral splint during 24 h. DNA checkerboard hybridization method was used to identify and quantify 38 bacterial species colonizing formed biofilm on the abutment substrates. Results: Pathogens and non‐pathogens species were found colonizing the three substrates surfaces. Fusobacterium nucleatum, Neisseria mucosa, Porphyromonas aeruginosa, Peptostreptococcus anaerobios, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus gordonii, Streptococcus parasanguinis, and Tanerella forsythia were the only species with no significant differences over the tested materials (P > 0.05). All the other target species presented significant differences sought by Friedman test (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: There was a significant difference in the total bacterial count between the three groups. CPT presented the higher mean counts, followed by MPT and Zc. CPT group also showed a higher mean incidence of species than MPT and Zc. The anterior or posterior region of disks placement did not show significant differences in relation to bacterial adhesion.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/clr.12093

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 161

Metadata

Authors
Nascimento, C. D., Pita, M. S., Fernandes, F. H. N. C., Pedrazzi, V., de Albuquerque Junior, R. F., & Ribeiro, R. F.
Venue
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-01-14
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
337-343
ISSN
  • 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0501
OpenAlex
W2083109463
Cited by
161
References
1
FWCI
10.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bacterial adhesion on the titanium and zirconia abutment surfaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/clr.12093
The paper
Nascimento, C. D., Pita, M. S., Fernandes, F. H. N. C., Pedrazzi, V., de Albuquerque Junior, R. F., & Ribeiro, R. F. (2014). Bacterial adhesion on the titanium and zirconia abutment surfaces. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12093

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.