Retraction: Bacterial adhesion and colonization differences between zirconia and titanium implant abutments: an in vivo human study

This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief, because the authors plagiarized a previously published paper that had appeared in: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 26 (2011) 101–107. This article presented the same table and figures as the original study, and changed 2 of the tables to figures. This article reflects severe abuse of the scientific publishing system, and has therefore been retracted.

Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical resistance of four different osteosyntheses modeled in two different sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) designs and to determine the linear loading in a universal testing machine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An in vitro experiment was conducted with 40 polyurethane hemimandibles. The samples were divided into two groups based on osteotomy design; Group I, right angles between osteotomies and Group II, no right angles between osteotomies. In each group, the hemimandibles were distributed into four subgroups according to the osteosynthesis method, using one 4-hole 2.0 mm conventional or locking plate, with or without one bicortical screw with a length of 12.0 mm (hybrid technique). Each subgroup contained five samples and was subjected to a linear loading test in a universal testing machine. RESULTS: The peak load and peak displacement were compared for statistical significance using PASW Statistics 18.0 (IBM Co., USA). In general, there was no difference between the peak load and peak displacement related to osteotomy design. However, when the subgroups were compared, the osteotomy without right angles offered higher mechanical resistance when one conventional or locking 2.0 mm plate was used. One locking plate with one bicortical screw showed higher mechanical resistance (162.72±42.55 N), and these results were statistically significantly compared to one conventional plate with monocortical screws (P=0.016) and one locking plate with monocortical screws (P=0.012). The difference in peak displacement was not statistically significant based on osteotomy design or internal fixation system configuration. CONCLUSION: The placement of one bicortical screw in the distal region promoted better stabilization of SSRO. The osteotomy design did not influence the mechanical behavior of SSRO when the hybrid technique was applied.

An in vitro comparison between two different designs of sagittal split ramus osteotomy

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of the type of osteotomy in the inferior aspect of the mandible on the mechanical performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 20 polyurethane hemimandibles. A sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) was designed in 10 hemimandibles (group 1) with a vertical osteotomy in the buccal side (second molar level) and final osteotomy was performed horizontally on the lingual aspect, while the mandible body osteotomy was finalized as a straight osteotomy in the basilar area, perpendicular to the body. For group 2, the same osteotomy technique was used, but an oblique osteotomy was done in the basilar aspect of the mandibular body, forming continuity with the sagittal cut in the basilar area. Using a surgical guide, osteosynthesis was performed with bicortical screws using an inverted L scheme. In both groups vertical compression tests were performed with a linear load of 1 mm/min on the central fossa of the first molar and tests were done with models made from photoelastic resin. Data were analyzed using Student's t-test, establishing a statistical significance when P <0.05. RESULTS: A statistical difference was not observed in the maximum displacements obtained in the two osteotomies (P <0.05). In the extensiometric analysis, statistically significant differences were identified only in the middle screw of the fixation. The photoelastic resin models showed force dissipation towards the inferior aspect of the mandible in both SSRO models. CONCLUSION: We found that osteotomy of the inferior aspect did not influence the mechanical performance for osteosynthesis with an inverted L system.

Bacterial adhesion and colonization differences between zirconia and titanium implant abutments: an in vivo human study

PURPOSE: Several parameters have been described for determining the success or failure of dental implants. The surface properties of transgingival implant components have had a great impact on the long-term success of dental implants. The purpose of this study was to compare the tendency of two periodontal pathogens to adhere to and colonize zirconia abutments and titanium alloys both in hard surfaces and soft tissues. METHODS: Twelve patients participated in this study. Three months after implant placement, the abutments were connected. Five weeks following the abutment connections, the abutments were removed, probing depth measurements were recorded, and gingival biopsies were performed. The abutments and gingival biopsies taken from the buccal gingiva were analyzed using real-time polymerase chain reaction to compare the DNA copy numbers of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and total bacteria. The surface free energy of the abutments was calculated using the sessile water drop method before replacement. Data analyses used the Mann Whitney U-test, and P-values below 0.05 find statistical significance. RESULTS: The present study showed no statistically significant differences between the DNA copy numbers of A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. gingivalis, and total bacteria for both the titanium and zirconia abutments and the biopsies taken from their buccal gingiva. The differences between the free surface energy of the abutments had no influence on the microbiological findings. CONCLUSIONS: Zirconia surfaces have comparable properties to titanium alloy surfaces and may be suitable and safe materials for the long-term success of dental implants.