A Randomized Pilot Clinical and Microbiological Study Comparing Laser Microtextured Implants with and without Platform Switching

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Prof. Quaranta and co-workers,

the article is very interesting and I agree with your discussion and your ideas.

I will ask to the editor to accept the article with minor revisions and modifications. These are the following suggestions.

LINE 41-44

I suggest to add also one other important factor that is the clinical experience of operators is really foundamental for the success rate of implants treatment and marginal bone loss. In this case it's important citing the following article:

Barone, Antonio & Toti, Paolo & Marconcini, Simone & Derchi, Giacomo & Saverio, Marchionni & Covani, Ugo. (2016). Esthetic Outcome of Implants Placed in Fresh Extraction Sockets by Clinicians with or without Experience: A Medium-Term Retrospective Evaluation. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 31. 1397-1406. 10.11607/jomi.4646. 

 

Immediately after LINE 50-52

I ask to you to add this important concept according my opinion: "The PS concept allowed to have the same microbiological advantages of tissue-level implants in bone level implants as also reported by last systematic review on this topic that did not highlithed any significant differences in terms of bone lost in these types of implants."

In this case you should cite the following recent systematic review:
Cosola, S.; Marconcini, S.; Boccuzzi, M.; Fabris, G.B.M.; Covani, U.; Peñarrocha-Diago, M.; Peñarrocha-Oltra, D. Radiological
Outcomes of Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Dental Implants: Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6920.

 

LINE 202-204:

You are using "Guidance marks" to standardize the measurement of implants for marginal bone loss in endoral radiographs. In this case you should cite this article that try to make a point in this standardization of radiographs.

Cosola et al. Standardization of three-dimensional pose of cylindrical implants from intraoral radiographs: a preliminary study. BMC Oral Health (2021) 21:100 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01448-9

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript submitted to Applied Sciences entitled A randomized pilot clinical and microbiological study com-paring laser microtextured implants with and without platform switching” is an original research article which aim to evaluate whether the combination of laser microtexturing (LM) with platform switching (PS) (test) showed additional benefit over and above LM implants alone (control) regarding clinical outcomes and periodontal-pathogenic microbiota.

On my opinion the article is interesting, well written, with good English. The prestige of the Authors of this manuscript is worldwide recognized. Anyway, I tried to split hairs.

• Abstract: Please structure the abstract to attract the reader's attention.
• Introduction: My main suggestion is to include a brief sentence on osseointegration and factors that can affect it: <<Osseointegration has been defined as a direct and functional connection between bone and an artificial implant. Both macroscopic and microscopic characteristics of dental implants could influence the success of these procedures [doi:10.23812/20-96-L-53]>>.
• Materials and Methods: This section has been properly prepared.
• Results: This section has been properly prepared.
• Discussion: I would suggest separating the conclusions into another section of the manuscript.
• English language: There are some typos.
• Subsection title: Please do not use abbreviations.
• Figures: Please improve quality and resolution.
• Abbreviations: Insert a summary of abbreviations used in the text prior to “Reference” section.

After making the indicated changes, the article will be suitable for publication.

Thanks for the opportunity to review this manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx