Premium
Mechanical non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis: a single‐blinded randomized longitudinal clinical study. II. Microbiological results
Author(s) -
Persson G. Rutger,
Samuelsson Emelie,
Lindahl Christel,
Renvert Stefan
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2010.01561.x
Subject(s) - peri implantitis , aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans , fusobacterium nucleatum , medicine , bleeding on probing , tannerella forsythia , dentistry , prevotella intermedia , veillonella , fusobacterium , periodontitis , bacteroides , surgery , implant , streptococcus , biology , porphyromonas gingivalis , pathology , bacteria , honeysuckle , alternative medicine , traditional chinese medicine , genetics
Persson GR, Samuelsson E, Lindahl C, Renvert S. Mechanical non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis: a single‐blinded randomized longitudinal clinical study. II. Microbiological results. J Clin Periodontol 2010; 37: 563–573. doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐051X.2010.01561.x Abstract Background: Peri‐implantitis is common in patients with dental implants. We performed a single‐blinded longitudinal randomized study to assess the effects of mechanical debridement on the peri‐implant microbiota in peri‐implantitis lesions. Materials and Methods: An expanded checkerboard DNA–DNA hybridization assay encompassing 79 different microorganisms was used to study bacterial counts before and during 6 months following mechanical treatment of peri‐implantitis in 17 cases treated with curettes and 14 cases treated with an ultrasonic device. Statistics included non‐parametric tests and GLM multivariate analysis with p <0001 indicating significance and 80% power. Results: At selected implant test sites, the most prevalent bacteria were: Fusobacterium nucleatum sp., Staphylococci sp., Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Helicobacter pylori , and Tannerella forsythia . 30 min. after treatment with curettes, A. actinomycetemcomitans (serotype a), Lactobacillus acidophilus, Streptococcus anginosus , and Veillonella parvula were found at lower counts ( p <0.001). No such differences were found for implants treated with the ultrasonic device. Inconsistent changes occurred following the first week. No microbiological differences between baseline and 6‐month samples were found for any species or between treatment study methods in peri‐implantitis. Conclusions: Both methods failed to eliminate or reduce bacterial counts in peri‐implantitis. No group differences were found in the ability to reduce the microbiota in peri‐implantitis.