Search

Mohamed Tharwat Hamed, 1 Hisham Abdullah Mously, 2 Saeed Khalid Alamoudi, 3 Abou Bakr Hossam Hashem, 4 Ghada Hussein Naguib 5 1Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Cairo University Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo, Egypt; 2Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 3King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 4 Dental Department, Research Institute of Ophthalmology, Giza, Egypt; 5Department of Restorative Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Department of Oral Biology, Cairo University Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo, EgyptCorrespondence: Mohamed Tharwat HamedDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi ArabiaEmail mohsarwat62@gmail.comPurpose: Dental implant is an effective and standardized treatment procedure in the healthcare setting. This study presents a comparison of dental implant reconstruction using screw and cement. It explicitly reviews the studies concerning cement and screws dental implants to determine the efficiency of the two.Patients and Methods: A systematic review was conducted by comprehensively searching electronic literature. The keywords, such as “Screw versus Cement Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions,” “Screw Retained Fixed Implant.” “Cement Implant” and “Dental Implant” were used for article searching. Twelve studies were included based on the determined inclusion and exclusion criteria.Results: No significant difference was found between the screw-retained and cemented retained implant supported reconstructions. Dental implants are associated with complications leading to implant failure based on the type of restoration that is being used; cement-retained restoration and screw-retained restoration. The treatment selection must be based on the significance criteria and the tooth condition.Conclusion: Screw-retained implant-supported reconstructions were found to pose less biological and technological complications. Retention of the tooth is more stable and functional when implantation is selected based on the efficiency of a treatment procedure.Keywords: dental implant, dental implant reconstructions, screw retained fixed implant, reversible

Ghada H Naguib,1,2 Gamal S Abd El-Aziz,3 Hisham A Mously,4 Wafaa A Alhazmi,5 Abeer M Alnowaiser,6 Ali H Hassan,7 Mohamed T Hamed4,8 1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 2Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt; 3Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 5Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 6Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 7Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 8Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, EgyptCorrespondence: Mohamed T HamedDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, P.O.Box 80209, Jeddah, 21589, Saudi ArabiaEmail mthamed@kau.edu.saPurpose: This in vitro study was undertaken to investigate the antimicrobial effect of distinctive oral mouth washes after the addition of zein-coated (Magnesium oxide) MgO nanoparticles on exemplary of some oral microorganisms.Materials and Methods: Three hundred and twelve samples were used in this study. A set of five concentrations of MgO nanoparticles with zein and without zein-coating were incorporated into three oral mouth washes: Listerine zero, Listerine total control and Oral B in the mass percentages of 0.3%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%, 5% and 10%, in addition to controls with no MgO nanoparticles. The antimicrobial effect of three mouth washes with variable concentrations of MgO was tested against the following organisms: Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans using the disc diffusion test (DDT) and direct contact test (DCT). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA statistical test.Results: The tested mouthwashes with zein-coated MgO nanoparticles showed significant differences of antimicrobial activity on S. mutans, S. aureus, E. faecalis, and C. albicans in the disc diffusion test. While in the DCT, all tested mouthwashes with MgO nanoparticles with and without zein coating showed antimicrobial activity on all tested microorganisms.Conclusion: Zein-coated MgO nanoparticles may be considered as a potential antimicrobial agent when added to oral mouthwashes. Future analysis, including in vivo studies, is required in order to incorporate zein/MgO nanoparticles into oral mouthwashes that may improve its antibacterial property.Keywords: MgO, nanoparticles, zein polymer, antibacterial, mouthwash