Biofilm formation on dental implants with different surface micro‐topography: An in vitro study

Abstract

Objectives:To compare biofilm formation on whole dental titanium implants with different surface micro-topography. Methods:A multispecies in vitro biofilm model consisting of initial (Streptococcus oralis and Actinomyces naeslundii), early (Veillonella parvula), secondary (Fusobacterium nucleatum) and late colonizers (Porphyromonas gingivalis and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans) was grown for 96 hr on sterile titanium dental implants with either minimal (S a : 0.5-1.0 mm) or moderate-roughness titanium surfaces (S a : 1.1-2.0 mm).The resulting biofilms were studied with Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) and Scanning Electron Microscope. Concentrations (colony-forming units per mL [CFU/ml]) of each bacterium were measured by quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) and compared by Student t tests.Results: A biofilm, located mainly at the peak and lateral areas of the implant threads, was observed on both implant surfaces, with a greater biomass and a greater live/dead ratio in moderate-compared to minimal-roughness surface implants. Statistically significant higher values of total bacteria (mean difference = 2.61 × 10 7 CFU/ml; 95% confidence interval -CI [1.91 × 10 6 ; 5.02 × 10 7 ]; p = 0.036), F. Nucleatum (mean difference = 4.43 × 10 6 CFU/ml; 95% CI [1.06 × 10 6 ; 7.80 × 10 6 ]; p = 0.013) andA. actinomycetemcomitans (mean difference = 2.55 × 10 7 CFU/ml; 95% CI [1.07 × 10 7 ; 4.04 × 10 7 ]; p = 0.002), were found in the moderate-compared to minimal-roughness surface dental implants.Conclusions: Implants with moderate-roughness surfaces accumulated more bacterial biomass and significant higher number of pathogenic bacteria (F. nucleatum and A. actinomycetemcomitans), when compared to implants with minimal-roughness surfaces, within a similar biofilm structure.

Biocorrosion of pure and SLA titanium surfaces in the presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis and its effects on osteoblast behavior

“…Several studies demonstrated that the bacterial coating on titanium surface was roughness-dependent and its adhesion to the rougher SLA surface was signicantly higher than the smooth surface. 32,33 In addition, as mentioned above, LPS and VSCs released form P. gingivalis could potentially promote titanium corrosion. 16 Thus, the higher degree of bacterial attachment, as well as the enhanced corrosion, may lead to more changes on the SLA titanium surface, including roughness and wettability.…”

Peri‐implant soft tissue status and crestal bone loss around immediately‐loaded narrow‐diameter implants placed in cigarette‐smokers: 6‐year follow‐up results

“…Moreover, cigarette‐smoking also includes a state of oxidative stress in bodily tissues including oral epithelial cells . Furthermore, from a microbial perspective, it is hypothesized that pathogenic bacteria that are associated with the etiopathogenesis pf peri‐implant diseases in patients with conventionally‐loaded SDIs (such as Porphyromonas gingivalis and Aggregatibacter Actinomycetemcomitans ) are also associated the etiology of peri‐implant diseases in patients with immediately‐loaded NDIs . Additional studies therefore warranted to test these hypotheses.…”

“…Aggregatibacter Actinomycetemcomitans) are also associated the etiology of peri-implant diseases in patients with immediately-loaded NDIs. 32,33 Additional studies therefore warranted to test these hypotheses.…”

Antibacterial Activity and Impact of Different Antiseptics on Biofilm-Contaminated Implant Surfaces

“…The titanium disks were exposed to human saliva in order to reproduce the physiological protein layer known to mediate bacterial adhesion on the implant surface in vivo. Disks with moderate surface roughness (S a :1.30 µm) were used as 95% of the surfaces in currently commercialized implant systems are composed of titanium with a moderately rough topography [15], and the greater affinity of bacteria and peri-implantitis progression for this type of surfaces is well-known [16,17].…”