View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Kálvária sugárút 57., 6720, Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 2 Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Szeged, Tisza Lajos körút 64-66., Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 3 Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Szeged, Tisza Lajos körút 64-66., Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 4 Institute of Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Semmelweis utca 6., 6725, Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 5 Institute Pharmacodynamics and Biopharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Szeged, Eötvös utca 6., Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 6 Institute of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Semmelweis University, Nagyvárad tér 4., 1089, Budapest, , Hungary
  • | 7 Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Dóm tér 10., 6720, Szeged, , Hungary
  • | 8 Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Medical School, Szigeti utca 12., 7624, Pécs, , Hungary
Open access

Abstract

Implants have been considered the treatment of choice to replace missing teeth, unfortunately, peri-implant disease is still an unresolved issue. Contaminated implants may be decontaminated by physical debridement and chemical disinfectants; however, there is a lack of consensus regarding the ideal techniques/agents to be used for the decontamination. The objective of our study was to compare the decontaminating efficacy of different chemical agents on a titanium surface contaminated with Porphyromonas gingivalis, a typical representative of the bacterial flora associated with peri-implantitis. Commercially pure Ti grade 4 discs with a polished surface were treated with a mouthwash containing chlorhexidine digluconate (0.1%), povidone-iodine (PVP-iodine) solution (10%) or citric acid monohydrate (40%). Qualitative and quantitative assessment of cellular growth and survival were assessed by a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Significant differences in the quantity of P. gingivalis could be observed after 6 days of incubation. A numerical, but not statistically significant (P = 0.066) decrease in the amount of living bacteria was observed in the group treated with the PVP-iodine solution as compared to the control group. The chlorhexidine (CHX)-treated group presented with significantly higher cell counts, as compared to the PVP-iodine-treated group (P = 0.032), while this was not observed compared to the control group and citric acid-treated group. Our results have also been verified by SEM measurements. Our results suggest that for P. gingivalis contamination on a titanium surface in vitro, PVP-iodine is a superior decontaminant, compared to citric acid and chlorhexidine-digulconate solution.

Abstract

Implants have been considered the treatment of choice to replace missing teeth, unfortunately, peri-implant disease is still an unresolved issue. Contaminated implants may be decontaminated by physical debridement and chemical disinfectants; however, there is a lack of consensus regarding the ideal techniques/agents to be used for the decontamination. The objective of our study was to compare the decontaminating efficacy of different chemical agents on a titanium surface contaminated with Porphyromonas gingivalis, a typical representative of the bacterial flora associated with peri-implantitis. Commercially pure Ti grade 4 discs with a polished surface were treated with a mouthwash containing chlorhexidine digluconate (0.1%), povidone-iodine (PVP-iodine) solution (10%) or citric acid monohydrate (40%). Qualitative and quantitative assessment of cellular growth and survival were assessed by a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Significant differences in the quantity of P. gingivalis could be observed after 6 days of incubation. A numerical, but not statistically significant (P = 0.066) decrease in the amount of living bacteria was observed in the group treated with the PVP-iodine solution as compared to the control group. The chlorhexidine (CHX)-treated group presented with significantly higher cell counts, as compared to the PVP-iodine-treated group (P = 0.032), while this was not observed compared to the control group and citric acid-treated group. Our results have also been verified by SEM measurements. Our results suggest that for P. gingivalis contamination on a titanium surface in vitro, PVP-iodine is a superior decontaminant, compared to citric acid and chlorhexidine-digulconate solution.

Introduction

Over the past decades, implants have been considered the treatment of choice to replace missing teeth, as they have shown high survival rates (ranging from 90 to 98%) after being in function for at least 10 years [1–6]. Unfortunately, subsequent development of peri-implant diseases is still an unresolved issue [7–10]. Peri-implant infections include peri-implant mucositis (which can be defined as a reversible inflammatory response of the peri-implant soft tissues without bone loss) and peri-implantitis (an inflammatory process resulting in the loss of supporting bone associated with suppuration and bleeding) [11–14]. Marginal peri-implantitis can be traced back to infectious and biomechanical factors [15]. One of the key events in the pathogenesis is the development of microbial colonization on the surface of the dental implant [16, 17]. Peri-implant infections have mostly been linked to Gram-negative anaerobic bacteria [18, 19]; the toxin release by these pathogens provokes a massive immune response, which causes bone degradation, ultimately leading to implant loss [20].

Clinical signs of peri-implantitis include increased probing depths, mucosal recession, fistula formation, suppuration, mucosal swelling and bleeding on probing (BOP) [13, 21, 22]. Once peri-implant disease is diagnosed, the treating physician will be hard-pressed to deal with this issue. Various treatment modalities have been suggested and attempted with the aim of treating this oral pathology. In the case of peri-implant mucositis, non-surgical mechanical treatment may be effective and the outcome of therapy may be further enhanced with the usie of antimicrobial mouth rinses [11]. However, for peri-implantitis lesions, nonsurgical therapy alone was found to be ineffective [23]; for successful surgical interventions, the contaminated implant surface must be entirely decontaminated. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the techniques/agents to be used for decontamination [11]. Several agents have been suggested by the literature; nevertheless, citric acid, chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVP-iodine) are probably the most often discussed ones [24, 25].

The objective of our study was to compare the decontaminating efficacy of the abovementioned three chemical agents on polished titanium (Ti) surfaces infected with Porphyromonas gingivalis, a typical representative of the bacterial flora associated with peri-implantitis.

Materials and methods

Preparation of Ti implant discs, sample design

During the present study, mechanically polished Ti implant discs (9 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness; commercially pure (CP) Grade 4; Protetim Ltd., Hódmezővásárhely, Hungary) were used. Similarly to the transgingival part of dental implants, the discs were polished to a surface roughness not exceeding 0.2 µm [10]. After cleaning in an ultrasonic bath with acetone, absolute ethanol and distilled water for 15 min, each sample was dried before use. The Ti discs were grouped into four different treatment groups, each group consisting of n = 4 four pieces for each independent experiment. The first group was the control group: after the cleaning and drying of the discs, no chemical treatment was applied. The others were immersed into a solution of one of the dental implant surface decontaminating agents for 60 min, the following chemical agents were used in this study: 0.1% chlorhexidine digluconate (second group; Corsodyl®, GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford. UK), 10% PVP-iodine solution (third group; Betadine®, Purdue Pharma LP, Stamford, CT, USA) and 40 w/w% citric acid monohydrate solution prepared in deionized water (fourth group; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Hampton, VI, USA). The discs were always handled with Ti forceps to avoid contamination of the Ti surface with other metals [18]. For each round of experiments, n = 16 Ti samples were used: n = 12 Ti discs were immersed into one of the prophylactic agents, and n = 4 samples were left untreated (control group) but went through the same cleaning procedure. Three independent experiments were performed, with altogether n = 48 titanium discs. After 60 min of immersion, the samples were washed with ultrapure water (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Hampton, VI, USA) and dried.

The application time of different decontamination solutions corresponds to different time periods or effects of accumulated use under clinical circumstances: for CHX, the dose corresponds to 4 months of regular use, for citric acid, it corresponds to 12 clinical uses, while for PVP-iodine treatment, the dose was equivalent for 20 clinical uses. This was calculated based on available literature data and the manufacturer's instructions [26–28]. All treated and control discs were steam-sterilized at 160 C for 45 min and stored in closed packaging until use. The experiments were always performed within packaging expiration time, which was 14 days [19].

Preparation of Porphyromonas gingivalis inoculum

Columbia agar base (Oxoid, Basingstoke, United Kingdom) supplemented with 5 v/v% cattle blood, hemin and vitamin K1 was used for the culturing of P. gingivalis. Fresh colonies of P. gingivalis strain ATCC 33277, incubated in an atmosphere of 90% N2, 5% H2 and 5% CO2 in an anaerobic environment for 48 h (Concept 400 anaerobic incubator, Biotrace International Plc., UK) were suspended in reduced Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) broth (Oxoid, Basingstoke, United Kingdom) and used after gentle dispersion (at a bacterial cell density of McFarland 1.0 dilution). 2 mL aliquots of these bacterial suspensions were immediately plated onto 24-well sterile microtiter plates, containing the different Ti discs from the respective groups. Every second day, the bacterial suspension was changed for a fresh solution. After 6 days of anaerobic incubation (under 90% N2, 5% H2 and 5% CO2 in the abovementioned anaerobic incubatior), the samples were removed from the bacterial culture.

MTT assay

The MTT [3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide] assay was used for the determination of bacterial growth and viability, during which the activity of mitochondrial dehydrogenases in living bacterial cells is measured, corresponding to a color change (due to the reduction of yellow MTT into purple, water-insoluble tetrazolium salt), which may be quantifiable with spectrophotometric methods [29]. Cells were seeded into 48-well culture plates at a density of 3,000 or 104 cells/well and grown on Ti discs in culture media for 24 or 72 h, respectively. The supernatant was removed and replaced with 0.5 mg/mL MTT solution (Sigma-Aldrich GmbH, Germany) in RPMI medium without phenol red. After incubation for 4 h at 37 °C, the medium was gently removed from each well and the crystallized dye was solubilized with 2% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and 0.04 mM HCl in absolute isopropanol [30]. The optical density of was determined at 540/630nm with a Multiscan EX spectrophotometer (Thermo Labsystems, Vantaa, Finland) and Ascent Software (Thermo Labsystems, Vantaa, Finland).

Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) studies

After treatment with the disinfectant solutions and bacterial incubation, the Ti discs were treated with the following method for fixation: dehydration of the surface bacteria and bacterial biofilm, first by rinsing with ethanol solutions of increasing concentrations, (30–50–70–100 V/V%) then by a mixture of ethanol and acetone (90–10, 70–30, 50–50, 30–70, 10–90, 100% of acetone). Critical point drying (determined by an SPI 1320 apparatus) was applied, after which the discs were gold-coated by means of an Edwards sputter coater and subjected to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with JEOL JSM-7100F/LV instrument.

Statistical analysis

The results of the measurements were collected in a spreadsheet file Microsoft Excel 2013 (v15.0) (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA). Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica for Windows 10.0 (Statsoft, Tulsa, OK, USA). Besides the descriptive statistics, groups defined by the treatment of the chemical agents were compared with one-way ANOVA (with Tukey post hoc analysis). P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Assessment of biofilm-formation by SEM studies

Various amounts of biofilm evolved on the Ti disc surfaces depending on the treatment applied (see groups 1–4). This is well illustrated by the SEM images taken at day 6. Fig. 1 shows the surface of a control disc after 6 days of incubation with P. gingivalis. Some of the bacteria occurred in multiple layers, in an interconnected manner, in addition a biofilm has noticeably formed. Fig. 2 shows the surface of a disc treated with chlorhexidine and incubated with P. gingivalis for 6 days. Bacterial biofilm could be observed in several layers on the surface, which is not continuous. SEM analysis shows no substantial difference in comparison with the control group. Fig. 3 shows a SEM image of the surfaces of a Ti disc after treatment with citric acid-monohydrate and incubation with the model pathogen: some bacteria formed multiple layers of biofilm. Fig. 4 shows a Ti surface after treatment with 10% solution of PVP-iodine: note that the bacterial growth is negligible as compared to the rest of the treatments. Active reproduction of the bacteria was observed and the formation of a monolayer has not yet started.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of an untreated control disc. Magnification: 2,000×

Citation: Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica 68, 1; 10.1556/030.2020.01176

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a Ti disc treated with chlorhexidine and incubated with Porphyromonas gingivalis for 6 days. Bacterial growth is readily observable. Magnification: 2,000×

Citation: Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica 68, 1; 10.1556/030.2020.01176

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a Ti disc treated with citric acid monohydrate and incubated with Porphyromonas gingivalis for 6 days. Bacterial growth is observable in multiple layers. Magnification: 2,000×

Citation: Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica 68, 1; 10.1556/030.2020.01176

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a Ti disc treated with povidone-iodine and incubated with Porphyromonas gingivalis for 6 days. Bacteria are present, but to a notably lesser extent than on the citric acid- and CHX-treated and control surfaces. Magnification: 2,000×

Citation: Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica 68, 1; 10.1556/030.2020.01176

Assessment of the bacterial cell viability after different treatments

Significant differences in the quantity of P. gingivalis could be observed after 6 days of incubation. A numerical, but not statistically significant (P = 0.066) decrease in the amount of living bacteria was observed in the group treated with the PVP-iodine solution as compared to the control group. The CHX-treated group presented with significantly higher cell counts, as compared to the PVP-iodine-treated group (P = 0.032), while this was not observed compared to the control group and citric acid-treated group (P > 0.05; Fig. 5). Results by measurement are presented in Table 1.

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

Bacterial cell viability on the surface of Ti discs after 6 days of incubation with Porphyromonas gingivalis

Citation: Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica 68, 1; 10.1556/030.2020.01176

Table 1.

Results of individual measurements of the MTT assay

OD550/630nmTreatment groups
ControlPovidone-iodineCHXCitric acid
Measurement 10.0930.0720.1960.108
Measurement 20.1090.0850.1690.133
Measurement 30.1140.0930.2400.125
Measurement 40.0830.0700.0940.043
Measurement 50.0760.0640.0640.044
Measurement 60.0660.0900.0760.043
Measurement 70.0840.0610.0930.071
Measurement 80.0690.0660.0890.062
Measurement 90.0630.0600.0850.079
Average0.0840.0730.1230.079
SD0.0180.0130.060.04

Discussion

During our present study, the effects of different disinfectants were assessed on bacterial cell viability on Ti discs, where P. gingivalis was chosen as a model microorganism. The results obtained during our experiments confirmed our hypothesis that the use of different chemical agents has a substantial influence on bacterial growth on the dental material. Our in vitro results suggest that the right choice of disinfectant influences the resistance of Ti implant surfaces to bacterial growth, which should be considered a clinically important finding. In addition, chemical disinfection alone was found to be ineffective (no statistically significance was shown), which, however, is in accordance with the literature.

Considering both the quantitative (MTT assay) and qualitative (SEM studies) results of this study, the most effective treatment modality in this study was PVP-iodine. Several studies in the literature have reported on the highly substantive nature of CHX on titanium surfaces [31]; in their study, Kotsakis et al. concluded that the use of CHX is not recommended for the decontamination of titanium surfaces [32]. In contrast to CHX, exposition of osteoblast cell lines to PVP-iodine has been reported to lead to an initial decrease, but an increase of the mineralization activity over a longer period of time [33]. Furthermore, PVP-iodine has a broad antibacterial spectrum, including bacteria that have been associated with periodontal and peri-implant microflora [34]. The idea of using citric acid to treat peri-implantitis was based on empirical clinical success with its use in treating periodontitis, rather than results of systematic scientific research [35]. This positive effect of citric acid has been widely observed in periodontitis, revealing that this chemical agent can stimulate cementogenesis and may also enhance reattachment to the root surface [36–39]. In addition, citric acid has been shown to inhibit the growth of bacteria on root surfaces affected by periodontal diseases [40]. Although citric acid has shown great capacity for implant surface decontamination, more studies are needed to test and verify its efficacy [5].

The use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) is well documented in periodontal therapy and we included this agent in our studies due to its widespread use; its use has been proven to be effective in reducing periodontal inflammation and in controlling subgingival plaque formation [41]. This agent is thought to be a non-specific antibacterial agent and it directly interferes with the cell walls of bacteria, resulting in cell lysis [42, 43]. The use of CHX is advantageous due to its substantivity, which allows the agent to be absorbed into hard and soft oral tissues and be released over time. This effect can last up to 12 h. Nonetheless, several disadvantages are related to its use, like taste alterations, staining, and slight increase in calculus formation [43]. CHX have been widely used to treat peri-implantitis, but no study so far have managed to demonstrate the superiority of chlorhexidine over other decontamination agents [5]. In several previous studies on non-surgical peri-implantitis therapy, CHX was preferentially used as an antiseptic adjuvant, with variable clinical success [44–48]. Patients received a one-stage full-mouth scaling with or without chlorhexidine led to an improvement of the clinical parameters and a temporary reduction of the microflora at implants with mucositis [42]. More importantly, Kotsakis et al. have recently demonstrated that CHX is able to notably change the physicochemical properties of the titanium implant surfaces and markedly inhibit the activity of osteoblasts [32]. This raises the possibility of cytotoxicity, which questions the use of chlorhexidine in the treatment of peri-implant disease.

PVP-iodine is a topically used antiseptic agent with a broad antibacterial spectrum covering a multitude periodontopathogenic species. Lanker Klossner et al. [49] demonstrated that long-term use of PVP-iodine does not cause any bacterial resistance; however, Sahrmann et al. found that PVP-iodine reapplied frequently during scaling and root planning might enhance pocket depth reduction in initially deep pockets [34] and the adjunctive use of PVP-iodine during scaling and root planning may increase the clinical pocket depth reduction [35]. Another study showed the application of PVP-iodine gel in periodontal pockets allows a prolonged remnant effect compared with the solution PVP-iodine formula [36]. Although the efficiency of PVP-iodine seemed to be superior in comparison to citric acid based on the SEM findings, the statistical analyses did not show significant difference between these two agents.

During our studies, P. gingivalis was chosen as a model microorganism for antibacterial and biofilm-formation studies. The dental biofilm is a natural ecosystem, bacteria predominantly reside in structured, surface-attached communities embedded in a self-produced, extracellular matrix [24, 50, 51]. The oral Gram-negative obligate anaerobic bacterial species P. gingivalis is typically considered a so-called “late colonizer” of subgingival biofilms and has been related to several destructive periodontal diseases, including periodontitis and peri-implantitis [50]. The pathogenicity of P. gingivalis is reflected in a lot of different important virulence factors involved in tissue colonization and destruction, and interference with host defense systems. Peri-implant inflammation and lesions are of multifactorial nature, but it is a fact unequivocally supported by the literature that P. gingivalis plays a leading role in both cases [24, 50, 51]. In a previous study, it was demonstrated that P. gingivalis has the ability to colonize titanium surface in multiple interconnected layers, forming a biofilm, namely a polysaccharide coat (glycocalyx), which is a protective layer for the bacterial population [52, 53].

Conclusion

During our experiments, a comparison of different chemical disinfectant treatment protocols was performed with the aim of assessing the efficacy as antibacterial agents in clinical situations. The proliferation of P. gingivalis was measured, which is a pathogen, which plays a crucial role in the development of peri-implant inflammations. During the comparison we did find significant differences in microbial growth on the treated titanium discs, compared to the control group. However when compared to the chlorhexidine-digluconate-treated group, disk treated with PVP-iodine showed a marked reduction in bacterial count. Our results suggest that PVP-iodine is superior to CHX for the chemical disinfection of titanium surfaces in the context of P. gingivalis contamination. P. gingivalis still has a crucial role as a periodontopathogen, therefore studies regarding the response of this specific pathogen to various treatments does provide clinically useful knowledge to help combat periodontitis and peri-implantitis in the future.

Funding statement

M.G. was supported by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. M.G. was also supported by the Diseases (MDPI) Travel Award 2020 and ESCMID's “30 under 30” Award.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Data availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Gábor Braunitzer (dicomLAB Kft., Szeged, Hungary) for the help provided during the statistical analyses. The authors would like to thank Krisztina Ungvári for providing the authors with the protocol described in the Material and Methods section.

References

  • [1]

    Simonis P, Dufour T, Tenenbaum H. Long-term implant survival and success: a 10-16-year follow-up of non-submerged dental implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 2009; 21: 772777.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    Karoussis IK, Bragger U, Salvi GE, Burgin W, Lang NP. Effect of implant design on survival and success rates of titanium oral implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Impl Res 2004; 15: 817.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    Karoussis IK, Salvi GE, Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Bragger U, Hammerle CH, Lang NP. Long-term implant prognosis in patients with and without a history of chronic periodontitis: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Impl Res 2003; 14: 329339.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    Ferrigno N, Laureti M, Fanali S. Dental implants placement in conjunction with osteotome sinus floor elevation: a 12-year life-table analysis from a prospective study on 588 ITI implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 2006; 17: 194205.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    Suarez F, Monje A, Galindo-Moreno P, Wang HL. Implant surface detoxification: a comprehensive review. Implant Dent 2013; 22: 465473.

  • [6]

    Sinjab K, Garaicoa-Pazmino C, Wang HL. Decision Making for Management of Periimplant Diseases. Implant Dent 2018; 27: 276281.

  • [7]

    Aljateeli M, Fu JH, Wang HL. Managing peri-implant bone loss: current understanding. Clin Impl Dent Res 2012; 14: e109e118.

  • [8]

    Salvi GE, Bragger U. Mechanical and technical risks in implant therapy. Int J Oral Max Impl 2009; 24: 6985.

  • [9]

    Lang NP, Wilson TG, Corbet EF. Biological complications with dental implants: their prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Clin Oral Impl Res 2000; 11: 146155.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodont 2002; 29: 197212.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    Renvert S, Roos-Jansaker AM, Claffey N. Non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a literature review. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 305315.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    Norowski PA Jr, Bumgardner JD. Biomaterial and antibiotic strategies for peri-implantitis: a review. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2009; 88: 530543.

  • [13]

    Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 286291.

  • [14]

    Ungvari K, Pelsoczi IK, Kormos B, Oszko A, Rakonczay Z, Kemeny L et al.. Effects on titanium implant surfaces of chemical agents used for the treatment of peri-implantitis. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2010; 94: 222229.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    Uribe R, Penarrocha M, Sanchis JM, Garcia O. Marginal peri-implantitis due to occlusal overload. A case report. Medicina Bucal 2004; 9: 160162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    Kotsovilis S, Karoussis IK, Trianti M, Fourmousis I. Therapy of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 621629.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]

    Renvert S, Roos-Jansaker AM, Lindahl C, Renvert H, Rutger Persson G. Infection at titanium implants with or without a clinical diagnosis of inflammation. Clin Oral Impl Res 2007; 18: 509516.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    Vilarrasa J, Delgado LM, Galofre M, Alvarez G, Violant D, Manero JM, et al.. In vitro evaluation of a multispecies oral biofilm over antibacterial coated titanium surfaces. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2018; 29: 164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]

    Leonhardt A, Renvert S, Dahlen G. Microbial findings at failing implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1999; 10: 339345.

  • [20]

    Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al.. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Impl Dent 2008; 17: 515.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 292304.

  • [22]

    Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Diagnosis and management of peri-implant diseases. Austral Dent J 2008; 5: S43–8.

  • [23]

    Okayasu K, Wang HL. Decision tree for the management of periimplant diseases. Impl Dent 2011; 20: 256261.

  • [24]

    Kato A, Imai K, Sato H, Ogata Y. Prevalence of Epstein-Barr virus DNA and Porphyromonas gingivalis in Japanese peri-implantitis patients. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 148.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [25]

    Larsen OI, Enersen M, Kristoffersen AK, Wennerberg A, Bunaes DF, Lie SA, et al.. Antimicrobial effects of three different treatment modalities on dental implant surfaces. J Oral Implantol 2017; 43: 429436.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [26]

    Stein JM, Hammacher C, Michael SS. Combination of ultrasonic decontamination, soft tissue curettage, and submucosal air polishing with povidone-iodine application for non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: 12 Month clinical outcomes. J Periodontol 2017; 15: 113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [27]

    Han Q, Jiang Y, Brandt BW, Yang J, Chen Y, Buijs MJ, et al.. Regrowth of microcosm biofilms on titanium surfaces after various antimicrobial treatments. Front Microbiol 2017; 10: 2693.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [28]

    Barrak I, Urban E, Turzo K, Nagy K, Braunitzer G, Stajer A. Short- and long-term influence of fluoride-containing prophylactics on the growth of streptococcus mutans on titanium surface. Implant Dent 2015; 24: 675679.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    Mosmann T. Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Meth 1983; 65: 5563.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]

    Gajdács M, Spengler G, Sanmartín C, Marc MA, Handzlik J, Domínguez-Álvarez E. Selenoesters and selenoanhydrides as novel multidrug resistance reversing agents: a confirmation study in a colon cancer MDR cell line. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2017; 27: 797802.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [31]

    Kozlovsky A, Artzi Z, Moses O, Kamin-Belsky N, Greenstein RB. Interaction of chlorhexidine with smooth and rough types of titanium surfaces. J Periodontol 2006; 27: 11941200.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [32]

    Kotsakis GA, Lan C, Barbosa J, Lill K, Chen R, Rudney J, et al.. Antimicrobial agents used in the treatment of peri-implantitis alter the physicochemistry and cytocompatibility of titanium surfaces. J Periodontol 2016; 87: 809819.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [33]

    Schmidlin PR, Imfeld T, Sahrmann P, Tchouboukov A, Weber FE. Effect of short-time povidone-iodine application on osteoblast proliferation and differentiation. Open Dent J 2009; 203: 208212.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [34]

    Sahrmann P, Puhan MA, Attin T, Schmidlin PR. Systematic review on the effect of rinsing with povidone-iodine during nonsurgical periodontal therapy. J Periodont Res 2010; 45: 153164.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [35]

    Mombelli A, Feloutzis A, Bragger U, Lang NP. Treatment of peri-implantitis by local delivery of tetracycline. Clinical, microbiological and radiological results. Clin Oral Implant Res 2001; 12: 287294.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [36]

    Nilveus R, Egelberg J. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. III. The relative importance of coagulum support, flap design and systemic antibiotics. J Periodontol Res 1980; 15: 551560.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [37]

    Nilveus R, Bogle G, Crigger M, Egelberg J, Selvig KA. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. II. Healing after repeated surgery. J Periodontol Res 1980; 15: 544550.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [38]

    Crigger M, Bogle G, Nilveus R, Egelberg J, Selvig KA. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. J Periodontol Res 1978; 13: 538549.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [39]

    Nalbandian J, Cote N. Direct histological comparison of periodontal wound healing in the beagle dog with and without citric acid conditioning. J Periodontol Res 1982; 17: 552562.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [40]

    Daly CG. Anti-bacterial effect of citric acid treatment of periodontally diseased root surfaces in vitro. J Clin Periont 1982; 9: 386392.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [41]

    Soh LL, Newman HN, Strahan JD. Effects of subgingival chlorhexidine irrigation of periodontal inflammation. J Clin Periont 1982; 9: 6674.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [42]

    Zablotsky M, Meffert R, Mills O, Burgess A, Lancaster D. The macroscopic, microscopic and spectrometric effects of various chemotherapeutic agents on the plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite-coated implant surface. Clin Oral Impl 1992; 3: 189198.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [43]

    Zablotsky MH. Chemotherapeutics in implant dentistry. Impl Dent 1993; 2: 1925.

  • [44]

    Sahm N, Becker J, Santel T, Schwarz F. Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study. J Clin Periont 2011; 38: 872878.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [45]

    John G, Sahm N, Becker J, Schwarz F. Nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine. Twelve-month follow-up of a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study. Clin Oral Invest 2015; 19: 18071814.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [46]

    Renvert S, Lessem J, Dahlen G, Lindahl C, Svensson M. Topical minocycline microspheres versus topical chlorhexidine gel as an adjunct to mechanical debridement of incipient peri-implant infections: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periont 2006; 33: 362369.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [47]

    Porras R, Anderson GB, Caffesse R, Narendran S, Trejo PM. Clinical response to 2 different therapeutic regimens to treat peri-implant mucositis. J Periodont 2002; 73: 11181125.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [48]

    Thone-Muhling M, Swierkot K, Nonnenmacher C, Mutters R, Flores-de-Jacoby L, Mengel R. Comparison of two full-mouth approaches in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis: a pilot study. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010; 21: 504512.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [49]

    Lanker Klossner B, Widmer HR, Frey F. Nondevelopment of resistance by bacteria during hospital use of povidone-iodine. Dermatol 1997; 195: 1013.

  • [50]

    Kato A, Imai K, Ochiai K, Ogata Y. Prevalence and quantitative analysis of Epstein-Barr virus DNA and Porphyromonas gingivalis associated with Japanese chronic periodontitis patients. Clin Oral Invest 2015; 19: 16051610.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [51]

    Tzach-Nahman R, Mizraji G, Shapira L, Nussbaum G, Wilensky A. Oral infection with Porphyromonas gingivalis induces peri-implantitis in a murine model: Evaluation of bone loss and the local inflammatory response. J Clin Periont 2017; 44: 739748.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [52]

    Stajer A, Urban E, Pelsoczi IK, Mihalik E, Rakonczay Z, Nagy K, et al.. Effect of caries preventive products on the growth of bacterial biofilm on titanium surface. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung 2012; 59: 5161.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [53]

    Venkei A, Eördegh G, Turzó K, Urbán E, Ungvári K. A simplified in vitro model for investigation of the antimicrobial efficacy of various antiseptic agents to prevent peri-implantitis, Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung 2020; 67: 127132.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [1]

    Simonis P, Dufour T, Tenenbaum H. Long-term implant survival and success: a 10-16-year follow-up of non-submerged dental implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 2009; 21: 772777.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    Karoussis IK, Bragger U, Salvi GE, Burgin W, Lang NP. Effect of implant design on survival and success rates of titanium oral implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Impl Res 2004; 15: 817.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    Karoussis IK, Salvi GE, Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Bragger U, Hammerle CH, Lang NP. Long-term implant prognosis in patients with and without a history of chronic periodontitis: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Impl Res 2003; 14: 329339.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    Ferrigno N, Laureti M, Fanali S. Dental implants placement in conjunction with osteotome sinus floor elevation: a 12-year life-table analysis from a prospective study on 588 ITI implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 2006; 17: 194205.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    Suarez F, Monje A, Galindo-Moreno P, Wang HL. Implant surface detoxification: a comprehensive review. Implant Dent 2013; 22: 465473.

  • [6]

    Sinjab K, Garaicoa-Pazmino C, Wang HL. Decision Making for Management of Periimplant Diseases. Implant Dent 2018; 27: 276281.

  • [7]

    Aljateeli M, Fu JH, Wang HL. Managing peri-implant bone loss: current understanding. Clin Impl Dent Res 2012; 14: e109e118.

  • [8]

    Salvi GE, Bragger U. Mechanical and technical risks in implant therapy. Int J Oral Max Impl 2009; 24: 6985.

  • [9]

    Lang NP, Wilson TG, Corbet EF. Biological complications with dental implants: their prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Clin Oral Impl Res 2000; 11: 146155.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodont 2002; 29: 197212.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    Renvert S, Roos-Jansaker AM, Claffey N. Non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a literature review. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 305315.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    Norowski PA Jr, Bumgardner JD. Biomaterial and antibiotic strategies for peri-implantitis: a review. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2009; 88: 530543.

  • [13]

    Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 286291.

  • [14]

    Ungvari K, Pelsoczi IK, Kormos B, Oszko A, Rakonczay Z, Kemeny L et al.. Effects on titanium implant surfaces of chemical agents used for the treatment of peri-implantitis. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2010; 94: 222229.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    Uribe R, Penarrocha M, Sanchis JM, Garcia O. Marginal peri-implantitis due to occlusal overload. A case report. Medicina Bucal 2004; 9: 160162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    Kotsovilis S, Karoussis IK, Trianti M, Fourmousis I. Therapy of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 621629.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]

    Renvert S, Roos-Jansaker AM, Lindahl C, Renvert H, Rutger Persson G. Infection at titanium implants with or without a clinical diagnosis of inflammation. Clin Oral Impl Res 2007; 18: 509516.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    Vilarrasa J, Delgado LM, Galofre M, Alvarez G, Violant D, Manero JM, et al.. In vitro evaluation of a multispecies oral biofilm over antibacterial coated titanium surfaces. J Biomed Mat Res Part B 2018; 29: 164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]

    Leonhardt A, Renvert S, Dahlen G. Microbial findings at failing implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1999; 10: 339345.

  • [20]

    Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al.. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Impl Dent 2008; 17: 515.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. J Clin Periodont 2008; 35: 292304.

  • [22]

    Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Diagnosis and management of peri-implant diseases. Austral Dent J 2008; 5: S43–8.

  • [23]

    Okayasu K, Wang HL. Decision tree for the management of periimplant diseases. Impl Dent 2011; 20: 256261.

  • [24]

    Kato A, Imai K, Sato H, Ogata Y. Prevalence of Epstein-Barr virus DNA and Porphyromonas gingivalis in Japanese peri-implantitis patients. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 148.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [25]

    Larsen OI, Enersen M, Kristoffersen AK, Wennerberg A, Bunaes DF, Lie SA, et al.. Antimicrobial effects of three different treatment modalities on dental implant surfaces. J Oral Implantol 2017; 43: 429436.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [26]

    Stein JM, Hammacher C, Michael SS. Combination of ultrasonic decontamination, soft tissue curettage, and submucosal air polishing with povidone-iodine application for non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: 12 Month clinical outcomes. J Periodontol 2017; 15: 113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [27]

    Han Q, Jiang Y, Brandt BW, Yang J, Chen Y, Buijs MJ, et al.. Regrowth of microcosm biofilms on titanium surfaces after various antimicrobial treatments. Front Microbiol 2017; 10: 2693.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [28]

    Barrak I, Urban E, Turzo K, Nagy K, Braunitzer G, Stajer A. Short- and long-term influence of fluoride-containing prophylactics on the growth of streptococcus mutans on titanium surface. Implant Dent 2015; 24: 675679.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    Mosmann T. Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Meth 1983; 65: 5563.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]

    Gajdács M, Spengler G, Sanmartín C, Marc MA, Handzlik J, Domínguez-Álvarez E. Selenoesters and selenoanhydrides as novel multidrug resistance reversing agents: a confirmation study in a colon cancer MDR cell line. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2017; 27: 797802.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [31]

    Kozlovsky A, Artzi Z, Moses O, Kamin-Belsky N, Greenstein RB. Interaction of chlorhexidine with smooth and rough types of titanium surfaces. J Periodontol 2006; 27: 11941200.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [32]

    Kotsakis GA, Lan C, Barbosa J, Lill K, Chen R, Rudney J, et al.. Antimicrobial agents used in the treatment of peri-implantitis alter the physicochemistry and cytocompatibility of titanium surfaces. J Periodontol 2016; 87: 809819.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [33]

    Schmidlin PR, Imfeld T, Sahrmann P, Tchouboukov A, Weber FE. Effect of short-time povidone-iodine application on osteoblast proliferation and differentiation. Open Dent J 2009; 203: 208212.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [34]

    Sahrmann P, Puhan MA, Attin T, Schmidlin PR. Systematic review on the effect of rinsing with povidone-iodine during nonsurgical periodontal therapy. J Periodont Res 2010; 45: 153164.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [35]

    Mombelli A, Feloutzis A, Bragger U, Lang NP. Treatment of peri-implantitis by local delivery of tetracycline. Clinical, microbiological and radiological results. Clin Oral Implant Res 2001; 12: 287294.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [36]

    Nilveus R, Egelberg J. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. III. The relative importance of coagulum support, flap design and systemic antibiotics. J Periodontol Res 1980; 15: 551560.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [37]

    Nilveus R, Bogle G, Crigger M, Egelberg J, Selvig KA. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. II. Healing after repeated surgery. J Periodontol Res 1980; 15: 544550.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [38]

    Crigger M, Bogle G, Nilveus R, Egelberg J, Selvig KA. The effect of topical citric acid application on the healing of experimental furcation defects in dogs. J Periodontol Res 1978; 13: 538549.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [39]

    Nalbandian J, Cote N. Direct histological comparison of periodontal wound healing in the beagle dog with and without citric acid conditioning. J Periodontol Res 1982; 17: 552562.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [40]

    Daly CG. Anti-bacterial effect of citric acid treatment of periodontally diseased root surfaces in vitro. J Clin Periont 1982; 9: 386392.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [41]

    Soh LL, Newman HN, Strahan JD. Effects of subgingival chlorhexidine irrigation of periodontal inflammation. J Clin Periont 1982; 9: 6674.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [42]

    Zablotsky M, Meffert R, Mills O, Burgess A, Lancaster D. The macroscopic, microscopic and spectrometric effects of various chemotherapeutic agents on the plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite-coated implant surface. Clin Oral Impl 1992; 3: 189198.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [43]

    Zablotsky MH. Chemotherapeutics in implant dentistry. Impl Dent 1993; 2: 1925.

  • [44]

    Sahm N, Becker J, Santel T, Schwarz F. Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study. J Clin Periont 2011; 38: 872878.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [45]

    John G, Sahm N, Becker J, Schwarz F. Nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine. Twelve-month follow-up of a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study. Clin Oral Invest 2015; 19: 18071814.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [46]

    Renvert S, Lessem J, Dahlen G, Lindahl C, Svensson M. Topical minocycline microspheres versus topical chlorhexidine gel as an adjunct to mechanical debridement of incipient peri-implant infections: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periont 2006; 33: 362369.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [47]

    Porras R, Anderson GB, Caffesse R, Narendran S, Trejo PM. Clinical response to 2 different therapeutic regimens to treat peri-implant mucositis. J Periodont 2002; 73: 11181125.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [48]

    Thone-Muhling M, Swierkot K, Nonnenmacher C, Mutters R, Flores-de-Jacoby L, Mengel R. Comparison of two full-mouth approaches in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis: a pilot study. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010; 21: 504512.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [49]

    Lanker Klossner B, Widmer HR, Frey F. Nondevelopment of resistance by bacteria during hospital use of povidone-iodine. Dermatol 1997; 195: 1013.

  • [50]

    Kato A, Imai K, Ochiai K, Ogata Y. Prevalence and quantitative analysis of Epstein-Barr virus DNA and Porphyromonas gingivalis associated with Japanese chronic periodontitis patients. Clin Oral Invest 2015; 19: 16051610.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [51]

    Tzach-Nahman R, Mizraji G, Shapira L, Nussbaum G, Wilensky A. Oral infection with Porphyromonas gingivalis induces peri-implantitis in a murine model: Evaluation of bone loss and the local inflammatory response. J Clin Periont 2017; 44: 739748.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [52]

    Stajer A, Urban E, Pelsoczi IK, Mihalik E, Rakonczay Z, Nagy K, et al.. Effect of caries preventive products on the growth of bacterial biofilm on titanium surface. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung 2012; 59: 5161.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [53]

    Venkei A, Eördegh G, Turzó K, Urbán E, Ungvári K. A simplified in vitro model for investigation of the antimicrobial efficacy of various antiseptic agents to prevent peri-implantitis, Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung 2020; 67: 127132.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

 

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE

Senior editors

Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Dóra Szabó (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Managing Editor: Dr. Béla Kocsis (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Co-editor: Dr. Andrea Horváth (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Editorial Board

  • Prof. Éva ÁDÁM (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Sebastian AMYES (Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.)
  • Dr. Katalin BURIÁN (Institute of Clinical Microbiology University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary; Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunobiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.)
  • Dr. Orsolya DOBAY (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Ildikó Rita DUNAY (Institute of Inflammation and Neurodegeneration, Medical Faculty, Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany; Center for Behavioral Brain Sciences (CBBS), Magdeburg, Germany)
  • Prof. Levente EMŐDY(Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.)
  • Prof. Anna ERDEI (Department of Immunology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary, MTA-ELTE Immunology Research Group, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.)
  • Prof. Éva Mária FENYŐ (Division of Medical Microbiology, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden)
  • Prof. László FODOR (Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, University of Veterinary Medicine, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. József KÓNYA (Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary)
  • Prof. Yvette MÁNDI (Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunobiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary)
  • Prof. Károly MÁRIALIGETI (Department of Microbiology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. János MINÁROVITS (Department of Oral Biology and Experimental Dental Research, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary)
  • Prof. Béla NAGY (Centre for Agricultural Research, Institute for Veterinary Medical Research, Budapest, Hungary.)
  • Prof. István NÁSZ (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Kristóf NÉKÁM (Hospital of the Hospitaller Brothers in Buda, Budapest, Hungary.)
  • Dr. Eszter OSTORHÁZI (Institute of Medical Microbiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Rozália PUSZTAI (Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunobiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary)
  • Prof. Peter L. RÁDY (Department of Dermatology, University of Texas, Houston, Texas, USA)
  • Prof. Éva RAJNAVÖLGYI (Department of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary)
  • Prof. Ferenc ROZGONYI (Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Zsuzsanna SCHAFF (2nd Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Prof. Joseph G. SINKOVICS (The Cancer Institute, St. Joseph’s Hospital, Tampa, Florida, USA)
  • Prof. Júlia SZEKERES (Department of Medical Biology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.)
  • Prof. Mária TAKÁCS (National Reference Laboratory for Viral Zoonoses, National Public Health Center, Budapest, Hungary.)
  • Prof. Edit URBÁN (Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.)

 

Editorial Office:
Akadémiai Kiadó Zrt.
Budafoki út 187-187, A/3, H-1117 Budapest, Hungary

Editorial Correspondence:
Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica
Institute of Medical Microbiology
Semmelweis University
P.O. Box 370
H-1445 Budapest, Hungary
Phone: + 36 1 459 1500 ext. 56101
Fax: (36 1) 210 2959
E-mail: amih@med.semmelweis-univ.hu

 Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Biological Abstracts
  • BIOSIS Previews
  • CAB Abstracts
  • Chemical Abstracts
  • Global Health
  • Index Medicus
  • Index Veterinarius
  • Medline
  • Referativnyi Zhurnal
  • SCOPUS
  • Science Citation Index Expanded
2020  
Total Cites 662
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
2,048
Rank by Immunology 145/162(Q4)
Impact Factor Microbiology 118/137 (Q4)
Impact Factor 1,904
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year 0,671
Impact Factor
Journal  0,38
Citation Indicator  
Rank by Journal  Immunology 146/174 (Q4)
Citation Indicator  Microbiology 120/142 (Q4)
Citable 42
Items
Total 40
Articles
Total 2
Reviews
Scimago 28
H-index
Scimago 0,439
Journal Rank
Scimago Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous) Q4
Quartile Score Medicine (miscellaneous) Q3
Scopus 438/167=2,6
Scite Score  
Scopus General Immunology and Microbiology 31/45 (Q3)
Scite Score Rank  
Scopus 0,760
SNIP
Days from  225
submission
to acceptance
Days from  118
acceptance
to publication
Acceptance 19%
Rate

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
485
Impact Factor 1,086
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,864
5 Year
Impact Factor
1,233
Immediacy
Index
0,286
Citable
Items
42
Total
Articles
40
Total
Reviews
2
Cited
Half-Life
5,8
Citing
Half-Life
7,7
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00059
Article Influence
Score
0,246
% Articles
in
Citable Items
95,24
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,07317
Average
IF
Percentile
7,690
Scimago
H-index
27
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,352
Scopus
Scite Score
320/161=2
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
General Immunology and Microbiology 35/45 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP
0,492
Acceptance
Rate
16%

 

Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica
Publication Model Online only Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 1100 EUR/article
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2021 Online subsscription: 652 EUR / 812 USD
Subscription fee 2022 Online subsscription: 662 EUR / 832 USD
Print + online subscription: 740 EUR / 930 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
1954
Publication
Programme
2021 Volume 68
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 1217-8950 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2640 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2021 0 91 71
Jul 2021 0 92 80
Aug 2021 0 99 83
Sep 2021 0 115 113
Oct 2021 0 85 73
Nov 2021 0 62 58
Dec 2021 0 0 0