↓ Skip to main content

Biofilm Formation on Different Materials Used in Oral Rehabilitation

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Dental Journal, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Biofilm Formation on Different Materials Used in Oral Rehabilitation
Published in
Brazilian Dental Journal, April 2016
DOI 10.1590/0103-6440201600625
Pubmed ID
Authors

Júlio C. M. Souza, Raquel R. C. Mota, Mariane B. Sordi, Bernardo B. Passoni, Cesar A. M. Benfatti, Ricardo S. Magini

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the density and the morphological aspects of biofilms adhered to different materials applied in oral rehabilitation supported by dental implants. Sixty samples were divided into four groups: feldspar-based porcelain, CoCr alloy, commercially pure titanium grade IV and yttria-stabilized zirconia. Human saliva was diluted into BHI supplemented with sucrose to grow biofilms for 24 or 48 h. After this period, biofilm was removed by 1% protease treatment and then analyzed by spectrophotometry (absorbance), colony forming unit method (CFU.cm-2) and field-emission guns scanning electron microscopy (FEG-SEM). The highest values of absorbance and CFU.cm-2 were recorded on biofilms grown on CoCr alloys when compared to the other test materials for 24 or 48 h. Also, FEG-SEM images showed a high biofilm density on CoCr. There were no significant differences in absorbance and CFU.cm-2 between biofilms grown on zirconia, porcelain and titanium (p<0.05). Microbiological assays associated with microscopic analyses detected a higher accumulation of oral biofilms on CoCr-based materials than that on titanium or zirconia that are used for prosthetic structures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Researcher 6 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 46 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 32%
Engineering 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Materials Science 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 52 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,078,765
of 25,543,275 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Dental Journal
#158
of 284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,027
of 315,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Dental Journal
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,543,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 284 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,073 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.