Poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) block copolymers for calcium phosphate mineralization and biofilm inhibition.

Poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) has long been used as an additive in toothpaste, partly because it reduces biofilm formation on teeth. It does not, however, reduce the formation of dental calculus or support the remineralization of dental enamel or dentine. The present article describes the synthesis of new block copolymers on the basis of PEO and poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) blocks using atom transfer radical polymerization. The polymers have very large molecular weights (over 10(6) g/mol) and are highly water-soluble. They delay the precipitation of calcium phosphate from aqueous solution but, upon precipitation, lead to relatively monodisperse hydroxyapatite (HAP) spheres. Moreover, the polymers inhibit the bacterial colonization of human enamel by Streptococcus gordonii, a pioneer bacterium in oral biofilm formation, in vitro. The formation of well-defined HAP spheres suggests that a polymer-induced liquid precursor phase could be involved in the precipitation process. Moreover, the inhibition of bacterial adhesion suggests that the polymers could be utilized in caries prevention.

A systematic review on the innervation of peri-implant tissues with special emphasis on the influence of implant placement and loading protocols

OBJECTIVES To systematically review the available literature on the influence of dental implant placement and loading protocols on peri-implant innervation. MATERIAL AND METHODS The database MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science, LILACS, OpenGrey and hand searching were used to identify the studies published up to July 2013, with a populations, exposures and outcomes (PEO) search strategy using MeSH keywords, focusing on the question: Is there, and if so, what is the effect of time between tooth extraction and implant placement or implant loading on neural fibre content in the peri-implant hard and soft tissues? RESULTS Of 683 titles retrieved based on the standardized search strategy, only 10 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, five evaluating the innervation of peri-implant epithelium, five elucidating the sensory function in peri-implant bone. Three included studies were considered having a methodology of medium quality and the rest were at low quality. All those papers reported a sensory innervation around osseointegrated implants, either in the bone-implant interface or peri-implant epithelium, which expressed a particular innervation pattern. Compared to unloaded implants or extraction sites without implantation, a significant higher density of nerve fibres around loaded dental implants was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS To date, the published literature describes peri-implant innervation with a distinct pattern in hard and soft tissues. Implant loading seems to increase the density of nerve fibres in peri-implant tissues, with insufficient evidence to distinguish between the innervation patterns following immediate and delayed implant placement and loading protocols. Variability in study design and loading protocols across the literature and a high risk of bias in the studies included may contribute to this inconsistency, revealing the need for more uniformity in reporting, randomized controlled trials, longer observation periods and standardization of protocols.