ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2025
Effects of silver nanoparticle coating on peri-implant mucosa and microbiome.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Integrating silver nanomaterials in wound healing: from physicochemical properties to clinical translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimWe conducted a study to investigate whether a silver nanoparticle (AgNP) coating on the surface of an implant superstructure could alter the microbiome of peri-implant tissues and to determine whether the AgNP coating would result in an improvement of gingival conditions and be effective in suppressing malodors.
methodWe conducted a single-blind, parallel group comparative study in 19 patients undergoing implant maintenance. The 9 patients in the experimental group were treated by applying an AgNP coating after ultrasonic cleaning of the implant superstructure. Ultrasonic cleaning alone was performed on the 10 patients in the control group. The efficacy of the AgNP coating was evaluated by the following procedures conducted at baseline and after 3 months: measuring the modified gingival index (mGI), analyzing odor patterns through organoleptic test and olfactometric device readings of the implant superstructure, and determining the composition of the peri-implant microbiome.Registry: the Ethics Committee for Clinical Research of Fukuoka Gakuen, TRN: 530, Registration date: 30 March 2022.
resultsThe mGI values in the intervention group were significantly decreased (p = 0.043) than in the control group. In the organoleptic test, no significant intergroup differences were found in the sensory scores, but the sensory comments indicated that the odor type had changed in the experimental group. Principal component analysis (PCA) of the odor patterns at baseline and after 3 months revealed a change in the axis of the first principal component in the experimental group, but no change in the control group. A comparison of the peri-implant microbiome composition between the experimental group and the control group after three months revealed that the experimental group exhibited a significantly higher relative abundance of Neisseria oralis and Ottowia species, and a significantly lower relative abundance of Veillonella parvula, Fretibacterium fastidiosum, and Tannerella forsythia than the control group.
conclusionThese findings suggest that the AgNP coating of the implant superstructure changed the composition of the microbiome, and that such a change may improve gingival conditions and provide a deodorizing effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.