Bacterial profiles and proteolytic activity in peri-implantitis versus healthy sites

Neilands, Jessica; Wickström, Claes; Kinnby, Bertil; Davies, Julia R.; Hall, Jan; Friberg, Bertil; Svensäter, Gunnel

doi:10.1016/j.anaerobe.2015.04.004

Cited by 27 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies reported the presence of biofilms formed mainly by Gram‐negative anaerobic such as Fusobacterium , Porphyromonas , Prevotella , and Tannerella , also anaerobic Gram‐positive cocci as Parvimonas and Peptostreptococcus . Unlike these previous studies, one noticeable difference for this study was the high frequency of enteric rods for cemented restored implants.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 63%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas colonization in mucositis and peri‐implantitis of implants restored with cemented and screwed reconstructions: A cross‐sectional study

Ramón-Morales

Medina

2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate the association between Gram‐negative enteric rods and Pseudomonas with mucositis and peri‐implantitis, in implants restored with cemented and screw‐retained reconstructions. Materials and Methods Individuals treated with implants, diagnosed with peri‐implant mucositis and or peri‐implantitis, participated in this study. Microbiota from the implant and the gingival sulcus of two neighboring teeth were also studied. The microorganisms were identified using matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry. Results A total of 52 and 51 implants cemented and screwed restored were evaluated in 31 patients. The presence of Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas (P = .01) was significantly higher in the cemented restored implants. When the unit of analysis was the implant, the presence of Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas was associated with cemented restored implants after adjustment for possible confounders (odds ratio [OR] = 3.7; 95% CI, 1.4‐10; P = .01); besides, peri‐implantitis was statistically significant in the multivariate model (P = .008). Considering the patient as a unit of analysis, peri‐implantitis was associated with cemented restored implants (OR = 9.4; 95% CI, 2‐46; P = .006); this statistically significant association remained after adjusting for potential confounders (OR = 6.8; 95% CI, 1.3‐37; P = .02). Conclusion The presence of Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas was associated with cemented restored implants; besides, peri‐implantitis was associated with cemented restored implants.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 63%

“…Parvimonas and Peptostreptococcus. 29,30 Unlike these previous studies, one noticeable difference for this study was the high frequency of enteric rods for cemented restored implants. Similarly, it was observed appreciably superior periopathogens in the peri-implant sulcus in the cemented reconstructions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas colonization in mucositis and peri‐implantitis of implants restored with cemented and screwed reconstructions: A cross‐sectional study

Ramón-Morales

Medina

2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…are correlated with the increase in BOP 1 to 6 months after loading [45]. Similarly, there is a significantly higher prevalence of Porphyromonas , Prevotella and anaerobic Gram positive cocci in peri-implantitis vs. peri-implant health [46]. In contrast, a reduction on spirochetes was found from implant placement on periodontal sites to 12 months [47].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microbial Profiles and Detection Techniques in Peri-Implant Diseases: a Systematic Review

Padial‐Molina¹,

López-Martínez²,

O’Valle³

et al. 2016

JOMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo describe the microbial profiles of peri-implant diseases and the main detection methods.Material and MethodsA literature search was performed in MEDLINE via PubMed database to identify studies on microbial composition of peri-implant surfaces in humans published in the last 5 years. Studies had to have clear implant status definition for health, peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis and specifically study microbial composition of the peri-implant sulcus.ResultsA total of 194 studies were screened and 47 included. Peri-implant sites are reported to be different microbial ecosystems compared to periodontal sites. However, differences between periodontal and peri-implant health and disease are not consistent across all studies, possibly due to the bias introduced by the microbial detection technique. New methods non species-oriented are being used to find ‘unexpected’ microbiota not previously described in these scenarios.ConclusionsMicrobial profile of peri-implant diseases usually includes classic periodontopathogens. However, correlation between studies is difficult, particularly because of the use of different detection methods. New metagenomic techniques should be promoted for future studies to avoid detection bias.

show abstract

“…It has also been demonstrated that having high levels of periodontopathic bacteria may be associated with an increased risk for periimplantitis (Rutar et al 2001). However, microbial composition related to peri-implantitis appeared highly variable (Neilands et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐term prospective cohort study on dental implants: clinical and microbiological parameters

Tenenbaum

Bogen

Séverac

et al. 2016

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Bacterial profiles and proteolytic activity in peri-implantitis versus healthy sites

Cited by 27 publications

References 35 publications

Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas colonization in mucositis and peri‐implantitis of implants restored with cemented and screwed reconstructions: A cross‐sectional study

Gram‐negative enteric rods/Pseudomonas colonization in mucositis and peri‐implantitis of implants restored with cemented and screwed reconstructions: A cross‐sectional study

Microbial Profiles and Detection Techniques in Peri-Implant Diseases: a Systematic Review

Long‐term prospective cohort study on dental implants: clinical and microbiological parameters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About