Oral Sciences, Dental School, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Department of Genomics and Health, The Foundation for the Promotion of Health and Biomedical Research (FISABIO), Valencia, Spain.
J Periodontol. 2023 Sep;94(9):1065-1077. doi: 10.1002/JPER.22-0749. Epub 2023 Apr 22.
Current periodontal treatment involves instrumentation using hand and/or ultrasonic instruments, which are used either alone or in combination based on patient and clinician preference, with comparable clinical outcomes. This study sought to investigate early and later changes in the subgingival biofilm following periodontal treatment, to identify whether these changes were associated with treatment outcomes, and to investigate whether the biofilm responded differently to hand compared with ultrasonic instruments.
This was a secondary-outcome analysis of a randomized-controlled trial. Thirty-eight periodontitis patients received full-mouth subgingival instrumentation using hand (n = 20) or ultrasonic instrumentation (n = 18). Subgingival plaque was sampled at baseline and 1, 7, and 90 days following treatment. Bacterial DNA was analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing. Periodontal clinical parameters were evaluated before and after treatment.
Biofilm composition was comparable in both (hand and ultrasonics) treatment groups at all time points (all genera and species; p[adjusted] > 0.05). Large-scale changes were observed within groups across time points. At days 1 and 7, taxonomic diversity and dysbiosis were reduced, with an increase in health-associated genera including Streptococcus and Rothia equating to 30% to 40% of the relative abundance. When reassessed at day 90 a subset of samples reformed a microbiome more comparable with baseline, which was independent of instrumentation choice and residual disease.
Hand and ultrasonic instruments induced comparable impacts on the subgingival plaque microbiome. There were marked early changes in the subgingival biofilm composition, although there was limited evidence that community shifts associated with treatment outcomes.
目前的牙周治疗包括使用手动和/或超声器械进行器械操作,这些器械可以单独使用或根据患者和临床医生的偏好组合使用,具有可比的临床效果。本研究旨在调查牙周治疗后龈下生物膜的早期和晚期变化,以确定这些变化是否与治疗效果相关,并研究生物膜对手动与超声器械的反应是否不同。
这是一项随机对照试验的次要结果分析。38 名牙周炎患者接受了全口龈下器械操作,分别使用手动(n = 20)或超声器械(n = 18)。在治疗后 1、7 和 90 天采集龈下菌斑样本。使用 16S rRNA 测序分析细菌 DNA。在治疗前后评估牙周临床参数。
在所有时间点(所有属和种),两组(手动和超声)治疗组的生物膜组成均相似(所有属和种;p[调整] > 0.05)。组内各时间点均观察到大规模变化。在第 1 天和第 7 天,分类多样性和失调减少,与健康相关的属(包括链球菌属和罗氏菌属)增加,相对丰度增加 30%至 40%。在第 90 天重新评估时,一部分样本重新形成了与基线更相似的微生物组,这与器械选择和残留疾病无关。
手动和超声器械对龈下菌斑微生物群产生了类似的影响。龈下生物膜组成发生了明显的早期变化,但与治疗效果相关的群落变化的证据有限。