Cargando…

Scanning electron microscopic analysis of adherent bacterial biofilms associated with peri‐implantitis

OBJECTIVES: Peri‐implantitis (PI) is caused by bacteria in the peri‐implant space but the consensus on microbial profile is still lacking. Current microbial sampling of PI lesions has largely focused on analyzing bacterial species that have been shed from the implant surface and captured in the pock...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Jae W., Bi, Jiarui, Owen, Gethin, Shen, Ya, Haapasalo, Markus, Wiebe, Colin, Tarzemany, Rana, Larjava, Hannu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10441592/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37157917
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.741
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Peri‐implantitis (PI) is caused by bacteria in the peri‐implant space but the consensus on microbial profile is still lacking. Current microbial sampling of PI lesions has largely focused on analyzing bacterial species that have been shed from the implant surface and captured in the pocket fluid. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the morphotypes of bacteria in biofilm covering the implant threads and explore whether certain morphotypes were associated with PI. METHODS: Fourteen failed implants were removed and instantly processed for scanning electron microscope analysis. The implants were imaged at three equally divided sub‐crestal levels of the exposed area. Bacterial morphotypes were identified and quantified by three examiners. Mobility and years in function were correlated to the presence of different morphotypes. RESULTS: The implants demonstrated the presence of variable bacterial morphotypes that did not correlate to disease progression in our study. Some implants were dominated by filaments and others showed the presence of combinations of cocci/rods or spirilles/spirochetes. In general, all implants showed variable morphologic biofilm composition. However, individual implants tended to have similar composition throughout the entire implant. Rods and filaments were dominant morphotypes throughout the surfaces and cocci showed increased presence toward the apical third. There were some differences in the biofilm morphology with mobility and time in function. CONCLUSIONS: The profiles of bacterial biofilm morphotypes in failing implants with similar clinical presentations were highly variable. While there were significant differences between implants, similar morphotypes in individual implants were often found throughout the entire surface.