Collaborating Professor of the Master in Oral Surgery and Implantology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Department of Microbiology and Virology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021 Aug;23(4):568-578. doi: 10.1111/cid.13028. Epub 2021 Jul 1.
Rough and/or plasma-activated abutments seem to be able to increase soft tissue adhesion and stability; however, limited evidence is available about bacterial contamination differences.
The aim was to investigate the oral microbiota on four dental abutments with different surfaces by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and culturomic approach.
Forty patients needing a single implant rehabilitation were involved in the study. Forty healing abutments, especially designed for the study, were divided into four groups according to the surface topography (1. machined [MAC], 2. machined plasma of argon treated [plasmaMAC], 3. ultrathin threaded microsurface [UTM], 4. UTM plasma of argon treated [Plasma UTM]). Random assignment was performed according to predefined randomization tables. All patients underwent surgical intervention for implant and contextual healing abutment positioning. After 2 months of healing, a sterile cotton swab was used for microbiological sampling for culturomics, while sterile paper points inserted into the sulcus were used for qRT-PCR.
At the end of the study, 36 patients completed all procedures and a total of 36 abutments (9 per group) were analyzed. qRT-PCR retrieved data for 23 bacterial species whereas culturomics revealed the presence of 74 different bacteria, most of them not routinely included into oral cavity microbiological kits of analysis or never found before in the oral microenvironment. No statistically significant differences emerged analyzing the four different surfaces (p = 0.053). On the contrary, higher total and specific bacterial counts were detected in the plasma-treated surfaces compared to the untreated ones (p = 0.021).
Abutments with different topographies and surface treatments resulted contaminated by similar oral bacterial flora. Abutments with moderately rough surface were not associated with a greater bacterial adhesion compared to machined ones. Conversely, more bacteria were found around plasma-treated abutments. Furthermore, data reported suggested to include new species not previously sought in the routine analyses of the oral bacterial microflora.
粗糙和/或等离子体激活的基台似乎能够增加软组织的附着和稳定性;然而,关于细菌污染差异的证据有限。
本研究旨在通过定量实时聚合酶链反应(qRT-PCR)和培养组学方法研究四种不同表面牙科基台的口腔微生物群。
本研究纳入了 40 名需要单牙种植体修复的患者。40 个愈合基台,专门为研究设计,根据表面形貌分为四组(1. 机械加工[MAC],2. 氩等离子体处理的机械加工 MAC[plasmaMAC],3. 超微螺纹微表面[UTM],4. 氩等离子体处理的 UTM[Plasma UTM])。根据预设的随机分组表进行随机分组。所有患者均接受了植入物和上下文愈合基台定位的手术干预。愈合 2 个月后,使用无菌棉签进行微生物培养组学采样,同时使用无菌纸尖插入龈沟进行 qRT-PCR。
研究结束时,36 名患者完成了所有程序,共分析了 36 个基台(每组 9 个)。qRT-PCR 可检索 23 种细菌的数据,而培养组学则显示存在 74 种不同的细菌,其中大多数未常规纳入口腔微生物分析试剂盒或从未在口腔微环境中发现。分析四种不同表面时,未出现统计学差异(p=0.053)。然而,与未处理表面相比,处理过的等离子体表面的总细菌和特定细菌计数更高(p=0.021)。
具有不同形貌和表面处理的基台被相同的口腔细菌菌群污染。与机械加工基台相比,表面略粗糙的基台并未与更大的细菌附着相关。相反,在等离子体处理的基台周围发现了更多的细菌。此外,报告的数据表明,需要纳入以前在口腔细菌菌群常规分析中未检测到的新物种。