A randomized, controlled, clinical study on a new titanium oxide abutment surface for improved healing and soft tissue health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A newly developed, anodized titanium oxide surface containing anatase has been reported to have antimicrobial properties that could reduce bacterial adherence to abutments. PURPOSE: To investigate if abutments with the anodized surface improve healing and soft tissue health in a randomized controlled study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Test abutments with a nanostructured anodized surface were compared with control machined titanium abutments. In total, 35 subjects each received a pair of test and control abutments. The primary endpoint was reduction of biofilm formation at test abutments at the 6-week follow-up. Secondary endpoints included several soft tissue assessments. qPCR for gene markers was used to indirectly evaluate healing and soft tissue health. RESULTS: No significant differences in biofilm formation were observed between test and control abutments, but soft tissue bleeding upon abutment removal was significantly lower for test abutments compared with control abutments (P = 0.006) at 6 weeks. Keratinized mucosa height was significantly greater at test abutments compared with control abutments at the 6-week, 6-month, and 2-year follow-ups. Significant gene expression differences indicated differences in healing and tissue remodeling. CONCLUSIONS: Abutments with an anodized and nanostructured surface compared with a conventional, machined titanium surface had no significant effect on bacterial colonization and proteolytic activity but were associated with better soft tissue outcomes such as a lower bleeding index at abutment removal and consistently greater height of keratinized mucosa throughout the 2-year follow-up, suggesting improved surface-dependent peri-implant healing and soft tissue health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".