Department of Advanced Oral Sciences & Therapeutics, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Umm Al Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
J Prosthodont. 2021 Mar;30(3):210-234. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13270. Epub 2020 Oct 14.
To evaluate and synthesize the existing evidence on the microbiological and human immune response associated with peri-implantitis in comparison to healthy implants.
Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched in October 2019 to identify clinical studies evaluating the microbiota and the immune response associated with peri-implantitis. Two reviewers independently screened the studies and used the full text to extract the data. A qualitative synthesis was performed on the extracted data and summary tables were prepared. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity among included studies, no meta-analysis was performed.
Forty studies were included in this review. Of these, 20 studies compared the microbiological profile of peri-implantitis with healthy implants. Nineteen studies focused on the immune response associated with peri-implantitis in comparison to healthy implants. Three studies focus on gene polymorphism associated with peri-implantitis. The most commonly reported bacteria associated with peri-implantitis were obligate anaerobe Gram-negative bacteria (OAGNB), asaccharolytic anaerobic Gram-positive rods (AAGPRs), and other Gram-positive species. In regard to immune response, the most frequently reported pro-inflammatory mediators associated with peri-implantitis were IL-1β, IL-6, IL-17, TNF-α. Osteolytic mediator, e.g., RANK, RANKL, Wnt5a and proteinase enzymes, MMP-2, MMP-9, and Cathepsin-K were also expressed at higher level in peri-implantitis sites compared to control.
Peri-implantitis is associated with complex and different microbiota than healthy implants including bacteria, archaea, fungi, and virus. This difference in the microbiota could provoke higher inflammatory response and osteolytic activity. All of this could contribute to the physiopathology of peri-implantitis.
评估和综合与健康种植体相比,与种植体周围炎相关的现有微生物学和人体免疫反应证据。
2019 年 10 月,我们检索了三个电子数据库(MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane Library),以确定评估与种植体周围炎相关的微生物群和免疫反应的临床研究。两位审查员独立筛选研究,并使用全文提取数据。对提取的数据进行定性综合,并编制总结表。由于纳入研究的临床和方法学存在异质性,因此未进行荟萃分析。
本综述纳入了 40 项研究。其中,20 项研究比较了种植体周围炎的微生物特征与健康种植体。19 项研究重点研究了与健康种植体相比种植体周围炎相关的免疫反应。三项研究关注与种植体周围炎相关的基因多态性。与种植体周围炎最常相关的细菌是专性厌氧菌革兰氏阴性菌(OAGNB)、非发酵性革兰氏阳性杆菌(AAGPR)和其他革兰氏阳性菌。关于免疫反应,与种植体周围炎最常相关的促炎介质是 IL-1β、IL-6、IL-17、TNF-α。破骨介质,如 RANK、RANKL、Wnt5a 和蛋白酶酶 MMP-2、MMP-9 和组织蛋白酶-K 在种植体周围炎部位的表达也高于对照。
种植体周围炎与健康种植体相关的微生物群不同,包括细菌、古细菌、真菌和病毒。这种微生物群的差异可能会引发更高的炎症反应和溶骨性活性。所有这些都可能导致种植体周围炎的发病机制。