Sealing agent reduces formation of single and dual-species biofilms of Candida albicans and Enterococcus faecalis on screw joints at the abutment/implant interface

Abstract

The aim of this research was to evaluate the efficacy of a commercial sealing agent at the abutment/implant interface against microleakage of single and dual-species biofilms of Candida albicans and Enterococcus faecalis into external hexagon (EH) and Morse taper (MT) prosthetic connections. A total of 216 samples of implants and their abutments were tested. Six groups (n = 36) were evaluated based on biofilm and period of incubation (7 and 14 days). The implant connections EH and MT (n = 18) were divided according to the use of the material (n = 9) (EH-T and MT-T: with the sealing agent; EH-C and MT-C: control). The biofilms were analyzed by microbial counting (CFU/mL) and SEM analysis and photographs of the material in the screw joints were also taken. Data were analyzed by Student t test, two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni test. For the single-species biofilms, there was a significant reduction in the growth of E. faecalis when compared MT-C and MT-T or EH-C and EH-T at 7 and 14 days. The same was observed for C. albicans biofilms. For dual-species biofilms of E. faecalis and C. albicans, the sealing agent was more effective in preventing microbial infiltration into the MT connection at 14 days, while microbial infiltration did not occur into EH connections even in absence of the sealing agent for both periods of evaluation. Overall, these data suggest that the presence of the sealing agent reduces or eliminates the microleakage of E. faecalis and C. albicans biofilms into the implants regardless of the period of incubation.

Comparison of the Morse Cone Connection with the Internal Hexagon and External Hexagon Connections Based on Microleakage – Review

“…In addition, references cited in included articles were also included in this review when they were appropriate. Twelve articles on the specific purpose of this review were included in this study (Ricomini Filho et al, 2010;do Nascimento et al, 2012do Nascimento et al, , 2015Jaworski et al, 2012;Tripodi et al, 2012;D'Ercole et al, 2014;Sahin and Ayyildiz, 2014;Verdugo et al, 2014;Scarano et al, 2015;Pereira et al, 2016;da Silva-Neto et al, 2017;de Sousa et al, 2019). The other articles included aimed to contextualize the reader and discuss the review.…”

Numerical Comparison of Transgingival and Subgingival Dental Implants in Regard to Their Stress Distributions

“…Another aspect of potential improvement over the external connection types is improving the transfer of loads in the surrounding bone and minimizing the gaps at the implant-abutment interface which may lead to bacterial colonization [10] and subsequent biofilm accumulation [11].…”

Performance of different abutment/implant joints as a result of a sealing agent

“…Some studies in the literature show that the Morse cone type is superior to other connections with respect to susceptibility to microbial infiltration [23][24][25][26][27][28]. However, Alves de Sousa et al [29] reported that the Morse cone type implant system was more susceptible to Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans infiltration than the external-hexagon implant system, which could jeopardize the success of oral rehabilitation with dental implants [29].…”

“…One of the reasons for implant failure is the prevalence of peri-implant infections affecting the supporting tissues that surround the implanted area, leading to the loss of the adjacent bone [29]. Some microorganism species, in addition to colonizing the external surface of the implant, can also be found at the interface of the implant and prosthesis connection, specifically in the micro-gap formed between the implant and the prosthetic abutment.…”

“…Some microorganism species, in addition to colonizing the external surface of the implant, can also be found at the interface of the implant and prosthesis connection, specifically in the micro-gap formed between the implant and the prosthetic abutment. This situation can be aggravated by the loosening of the screws contributing to peri-implant inflammation [29].…”