Payne Jeffrey B, Johnson Paul G, Kok Car Reen, Gomes-Neto João C, Ramer-Tait Amanda E, Schmid Marian J, Hutkins Robert W
Department of Surgical Specialties, College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
mSphere. 2017 Nov 29;2(6). doi: 10.1128/mSphereDirect.00527-17. eCollection 2017 Nov-Dec.
Little is known about longitudinal development of the peri-implant subgingival microbiome and cytokine production as a new sulcus forms after dental implant placement. Therefore, the purpose of this observational study was to evaluate simultaneous longitudinal changes in the oral microbiome and cytokine production in the developing peri-implant sulcus compared to control natural teeth. Four and 12 weeks after implant placement and abutment connection, a dental implant and a natural tooth were sampled in 25 patients for subgingival plaque and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF [around teeth] and peri-implant crevicular fluid [PICF] around implants). DNA from plaque samples was extracted and sequenced using Illumina-based 16S rRNA sequencing. GCF and PICF samples were analyzed using a customized Milliplex human cytokine and chemokine magnetic bead panel. Beta diversity analysis revealed that natural teeth and implants had similar subgingival microbiomes, while teeth had greater alpha diversity than implants. At the genus level, however, few differences were noted between teeth and dental implants over 12 weeks. Specifically, and were significantly elevated around teeth versus dental implants at both 4 weeks and 12 weeks, while and were significantly elevated only at 4 weeks around teeth. The only difference between PICF and GCF biomarkers was significantly elevated granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor levels around teeth versus dental implants at the 4-week visit. The subgingival microbiome and cytokine production were similar between teeth and implants during early healing, suggesting that these profiles are driven by the patient following dental implant placement and are not determined by anatomical niche. Dental implants are a common treatment option offered to patients for tooth replacement. However, little is known regarding initial colonization of the subgingival microbiome and simultaneous longitudinal cytokine production in humans during the early healing phase following implant placement. We report findings from an study that assessed initial colonization of the subgingival microbiome and concomitant early cytokine production in a newly formed anatomical space, namely, an implant sulcus. This approach may be useful in future interventional studies to influence dental implant success. Our data showed that the subgingival microbiome and cytokine profile were similar for control natural teeth and dental implants at both 4 and 12 weeks after implant placement. These data suggest that these profiles are driven by the patient and not by anatomical location (i.e., tooth versus dental implant).
关于牙种植体植入后新龈沟形成过程中种植体周围龈下微生物群的纵向发育和细胞因子产生情况,人们了解甚少。因此,本观察性研究的目的是评估与对照天然牙相比,正在发育的种植体周围龈沟中口腔微生物群和细胞因子产生的同步纵向变化。在种植体植入和基台连接后4周和12周,对25例患者的一颗牙种植体和一颗天然牙进行采样,以获取龈下菌斑以及龈沟液(牙齿周围的龈沟液[GCF]和种植体周围的种植体周围龈沟液[PICF])。从菌斑样本中提取DNA,并使用基于Illumina的16S rRNA测序进行测序。使用定制的Milliplex人细胞因子和趋化因子磁珠板对GCF和PICF样本进行分析。β多样性分析显示,天然牙和种植体的龈下微生物群相似,而天然牙的α多样性高于种植体。然而,在属水平上,在12周内天然牙和牙种植体之间几乎没有发现差异。具体而言,在4周和12周时,牙齿周围的 和 显著高于牙种植体周围,而只有在4周时牙齿周围的 和 显著升高。PICF和GCF生物标志物之间的唯一差异是在4周复诊时,牙齿周围的粒细胞-巨噬细胞集落刺激因子水平显著高于牙种植体周围。在早期愈合过程中,牙齿和种植体的龈下微生物群和细胞因子产生情况相似,这表明这些特征是由患者在牙种植体植入后驱动的,而不是由解剖位置决定的。牙种植体是为患者提供的常见牙齿替代治疗选择。然而,关于种植体植入后早期愈合阶段人类龈下微生物群的初始定植以及同步纵向细胞因子产生情况,人们了解甚少。我们报告了一项 研究的结果,该研究评估了新形成的解剖空间即种植体龈沟中龈下微生物群的初始定植以及伴随的早期细胞因子产生情况。这种方法可能对未来影响牙种植体成功的干预性研究有用。我们的数据显示,在种植体植入后4周和12周,对照天然牙和牙种植体的龈下微生物群和细胞因子谱相似。这些数据表明,这些特征是由患者驱动的,而不是由解剖位置(即牙齿与牙种植体)决定的。