[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-449832-105":59,"doc-detail-449832-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","comparative-microbial-assessment-of-different-screw-access-hole-plugging-materials-in-screw-retained-implants-an-in-vivo-study","Comparative Microbial Assessment of Different Screw Access Hole Plugging Materials in Screw Retained Implants - An In vivo Study","","Background: Various materials are used to plug the screw access hole (SAH) in screw-retained implant prostheses, yet bacterial contamination and leakage can drive inflammation around peri-implant tissues. Aim: To evaluate bacterial contamination of cotton (Co), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and cotton dipped in 1% chlorhexidine (Co1%CHX). Methods: Forty implant sites were studied, assigning SAH plugging material and analyzing recovered material and peri-implant sulcular fluid. Results: Cotton showed the highest contamination for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria; Co1%CHX reduced positive samples and counts versus PTFE. Conclusion: Leakage did not significantly increase IL-6 levels after 3 months.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparative-microbial-assessment-of-different-screw-access-hole-plugging-materials-in-screw-retained-implants-an-in-vivo-study/449832/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparative-microbial-assessment-of-different-screw-access-hole-plugging-materials-in-screw-retained-implants-an-in-vivo-study/449832.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"acoobca","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-04","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":81},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the study designed to evaluate?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study evaluated bacterial contamination of SAH plugging materials, comparing cotton, PTFE, and cotton dipped in 1% chlorhexidine (Co1%CHX).","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were implant sites and plugging materials assigned?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"After prosthetic restorations, cotton was initially used at all implant sites. Sites were then randomly divided into subgroups receiving Co1%CHX or PTFE, with the respective material retrieved for microbial analysis.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Did plugging material leakage significantly affect IL-6 levels after 3 months?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"No. Despite differences in bacterial contamination, leakage from SAH for both PTFE and Co1%CHX was insufficient to cause a significant increase in IL-6 levels in peri-implant sulcular fluid after 3 months.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},449832,1790790825,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":81,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},3985747870733,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Original Article  \nComparative Microbial Assessment of Different Screw Access Hole Plugging Materials in Screw Retained Implants: An In vivo Study  \nAbstract  \nBackground: Various materials are available to plug screw access hole (SAH) in a screw retained implant prosthesis. Bacterial contamination of this plugging material and its subsequent leakage can contribute to inflammation of peri‑implant area. Aim: The present study aimed to evaluate bacterial contamination of cotton (Co), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and cotton dipped in 1% chlorhexidine (Co1%CHX) as SAH plugging material. Materials and Methods: Forty implant sites were included in the study. After prosthetic restorations, cotton was used as the primary SAH plugging material in all implant sites. Next month, implant sites were randomly divided into subgroups Co1%CHX and PTFE and given respective plugging material after retrieving the cotton pellet, which was subjected for microbial assay the same day. On the next visit, respective plugging material was retrieved and sent for microbial analysis. SAH was re‑plugged with the respective plugging material. Peri‑implant sulcular fluid (PISF) was collected from respective sites and stored at − 80°C. After 3 months of the last visit, patients were recalled for the collection of PISF, stored suitably. All the PISF samples were analyzed for interleukin‑6 (IL‑6) levels via sandwich enzyme‑linked immunosorbent assay. Results and Conclusion: Bacterial contamination of cotton was highest and statistically significant when compared with both PTFE and Co1%CHX for both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Co1%CHX with fewer positive samples and lower bacterial counts was found to be a better plugging material than PTFE. However, the leakage from SAH for both PTFE and Co1%CHX was insufficient to cause any significant increase in IL‑6 levels in PISF of patients after 3 months.  \nKeywords: Contamination, microleakage, plugging material, screw access hole, screw retained implant  \nIntroduction  \nOver the past 35 years, dental implants have become the primary treatment for edentulous jaws. Implant failures are due to various mechanical or biological issues, with peri‑implant mucositis affecting 50% of implants,[1,2] often caused by microleakage at the implant‑abutment junction (IAJ) . Implant‑supported restorations can be screw or cement retained. Use of cemented restorations is advocated due to versatility in esthetics and passivity of fit but risks leaving excess cement.[3] Screw‑retained restorations are advantageous for their retrievability[4] but may suffer from screw access hole (SAH) microleakage due to wearing of the sealing composite restoration. This causes ingress of saliva and oral flora, creating a niche for proliferation of both  \nThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License (CC BY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.  \nFor reprints [contact:](contact: WKHLRPMedknow_reprints@wolterskluwer.com)[ WKHLRPMedknow_reprints@wolterskluwer.com](contact: WKHLRPMedknow_reprints@wolterskluwer.com)  \naerobic and anaerobic flora. Bacteria and its byproducts can further leak through the IAJ, into the peri‑implant area, thus posing a threat of peri‑implantitis.[5] Cotton pellet (Co), silicone sealing material, vinyl polysiloxane (PVS), gutta‑percha, and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) have been used to plug the SAH, to reduce its microbial contamination.[6,7] Cotton has been used asa conventional plugging material because of its ready availability and low cost. In comparison to cotton, which may act asan organic scaffold for disease‑causing oral flora, PVS and PTFE are supposed to reduce or nullify any microleakage by creating a long‑term hermetic seal. 0.12% chlorhexidine (CHX) is commonly used asa decon","cbCaioRLnJ1bo6D3","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaioRLnJ1bo6D3","pdf",1211614,"English","# Introduction\n## Screw-retained vs cement-retained restorations and microleakage\n## Peri-implant inflammation markers and rationale\n# Materials and Methods\n## Study design and grouping of SAH plugging materials\n## Microbial assay and PISF collection\n## IL-6 measurement\n# Results and Conclusion\n## Comparative contamination across materials\n## IL-6 changes after 3 months","[{\"question\":\"What was the study designed to evaluate?\",\"answer\":\"The study evaluated bacterial contamination of SAH plugging materials, comparing cotton, PTFE, and cotton dipped in 1% chlorhexidine (Co1%CHX).\"},{\"question\":\"How were implant sites and plugging materials assigned?\",\"answer\":\"After prosthetic restorations, cotton was initially used at all implant sites. Sites were then randomly divided into subgroups receiving Co1%CHX or PTFE, with the respective material retrieved for microbial analysis.\"},{\"question\":\"Did plugging material leakage significantly affect IL-6 levels after 3 months?\",\"answer\":\"No. Despite differences in bacterial contamination, leakage from SAH for both PTFE and Co1%CHX was insufficient to cause a significant increase in IL-6 levels in peri-implant sulcular fluid after 3 months.\"}]","Comparative Microbial Assessment of Different Screw Access Hole Plugging Materials in Screw Retained Implants - An In vivo Study | PDF",1790731180,15]