Profiles and differences of submucosal microbial in peri-implantitis and health implants: A cross-sectional study

  • Fei SUN ,
  • Jian LIU ,
  • Si-qi LI ,
  • Yi-ping WEI ,
  • Wen-jie HU ,
  • Cui WANG
Expand
  • Department of Periodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing 100081, China

Received date: 2022-10-10

  Online published: 2023-01-31

Supported by

the Beijing Natural Science Foundation(7214273);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(82173647);the Peking University Clinical Scientist Program(BMU2019LCKXJ010)

Abstract

Objective: To describe the submucosal microbial profiles of peri-implantitis and healthy implants, and to explore bacteria that might be correlated with clinical parameters. Methods: In the present cross-sectional study, 49 patients were recruited. Each patient contributed with one implant, submucosal biofilms were collected from 20 healthy implants and 29 implants with peri-implantitis. DNA was extracted and bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) genes were amplified. Submucosal biofilms were analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing at Illumina MiSeq platform. Differences between the groups were determined by analyzing α diversity, microbial component and microbial structure. The potential correlation between the bacteria with pocket probing depth (PPD) of peri-implant calculated by Spearman correlation analysis. Results: The α diversity of submucosal microbial of health group was significantly lower than that in peri-implantitis group (Chao1 index: 236.85±66.13 vs. 150.54±57.43, P < 0.001; Shannon index: 3.42±0.48 vs. 3.02±0.65, P=0.032). Principal coordinated analysis showed that the submucosal microbial structure had significant difference between healthy and peri-implantitis groups [R2=0.243, P=0.001, analysis of similarities (ANOSIM)]. Compared with healthy implants, relative abundance of periodontal pathogens were higher in peri-implantitis, including members of the red complex (Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola) and some members of orange complex (Precotella intermedia, Eubacterium nodatum, Parvimonas micra), as well as some new periodontal pathogens, such as Fillifactor alocis, Fretibacterium fastidiosum, Desulfobulbus sp._HMT_041, and Porphyromonas endodontalis. Spearman correlation analysis revealed that the relative abundance of Treponema denticola (r=0.686, P < 0.001), Tannerella forsythia (r=0.675, P < 0.001), Fretibacterium sp. (r=0.671, P < 0.001), Desulfobulbus sp._HMT_041 (r=0.664, P < 0.001), Filifactor alocis (r=0.642, P < 0.001), Fretibacterium fastidiosum (r=0.604, P < 0.001), Porphyromonas gingivalis (r=0.597, P < 0.001), Porphyromonas endodontalis (r=0.573, P < 0.001) were positive correlated with PPD. While the relative abundance of Rothia aeria (r=-0.615, P < 0.001) showed negatively correlation with PPD. Conclusion: Marked differences were observed in the microbial profiles of healthy implants and peri-implantitis. The members of red and orange complex as well as some new periodontal pathogens seem to play an important role in peri-implant disease. Compared with healthy implants, the submucosal microbial of peri-implantitis were characterized by high species richness and diversity.

Cite this article

Fei SUN , Jian LIU , Si-qi LI , Yi-ping WEI , Wen-jie HU , Cui WANG . Profiles and differences of submucosal microbial in peri-implantitis and health implants: A cross-sectional study[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2023 , 55(1) : 30 -37 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.01.005

References

1 Howe MS , Keys W , Richards D . Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis[J]. J Dent, 2019, 84, 9- 21.
2 Schwarz F , Derks J , Monje A , et al. Peri-implantitis[J]. J Periodontol, 2018, 89 (Suppl 1): S267- S290.
3 Kordbacheh Changi K , Finkelstein J , Papapanou PN . Peri-implan-titis prevalence, incidence rate, and risk factors: A study of electronic health records at a U.S. dental school[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2019, 30 (4): 306- 314.
4 Berglundh T , Armitage G , Araujo MG , et al. Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2018, 45 (Suppl 20): S286- S291.
5 Renvert S , Persson GR , Pirih FQ , et al. Peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis: Case definitions and diagnostic considerations[J]. J Periodontol, 2018, 89 (Suppl 1): S304- S312.
6 Araujo MG , Lindhe J . Peri-implant health[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2018, 45 (Suppl 20): S230- S236.
7 孙菲, 李思琪, 危伊萍, 等. 种植体周病非手术治疗中联合应用甘氨酸粉喷砂的临床效果评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54 (1): 119- 125.
8 de Waal YC , Eijsbouts HV , Winkel EG , et al. Microbial characteristics of peri-implantitis: A case-control study[J]. J Periodontol, 2017, 88 (2): 209- 217.
9 Paster BJ , Olsen I , Aas JA , et al. The breadth of bacterial diversity in the human periodontal pocket and other oral sites[J]. Periodontology 2000, 2006, 42 (1): 80- 87.
10 Renvert S , Roos-Jansaker AM , Lindahl C , et al. Infection at titanium implants with or without a clinical diagnosis of inflammation[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2007, 18 (4): 509- 516.
11 Zheng H , Xu L , Wang Z , et al. Subgingival microbiome in patients with healthy and ailing dental implants[J]. Sci Rep, 2015, 5, 10948.
12 Sanz-Martin I , Doolittle-Hall J , Teles RP , et al. Exploring the microbiome of healthy and diseased peri-implant sites using Illumina sequencing[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2017, 44 (12): 1274- 1284.
13 Nie J , Zhang Q , Zheng H , et al. Pyrosequencing of the subgingival microbiome in peri-implantitis after non-surgical mechanical debridement therapy[J]. J Periodontal Res, 2020, 55 (2): 238- 246.
14 Socransky SS , Haffajee AD , Cugini MA , et al. Microbial complexes in subgingival plaque[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 1998, 25 (2): 134- 144.
15 Al-Ahmad A , Muzafferiy F , Anderson AC , et al. Shift of micro-bial composition of peri-implantitis-associated oral biofilm as revealed by 16S rRNA gene cloning[J]. J Med Microbiol, 2018, 67 (3): 332- 340.
16 da Silva ES , Feres M , Figueiredo LC , et al. Microbiological diversity of peri-implantitis biofilm by Sanger sequencing[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2014, 25 (10): 1192- 1199.
17 Oliveira RR , Fermiano D , Feres M , et al. Levels of candidate periodontal pathogens in subgingival biofilm[J]. J Dent Res, 2016, 95 (6): 711- 718.
18 Fu JH , Wang HL . Breaking the wave of peri-implantitis[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2020, 84 (1): 145- 160.
19 Perez-Chaparro PJ , Duarte PM , Shibli JA , et al. The current weight of evidence of the microbiologic profile associated with peri-implantitis: A systematic review[J]. J Periodontol, 2016, 87 (11): 1295- 1304.
20 Kroger A , Hulsmann C , Fickl S , et al. The severity of human peri-implantitis lesions correlates with the level of submucosal microbial dysbiosis[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2018, 45 (12): 1498- 1509.
21 Galofré M , Palao D , Vicario M , et al. Clinical and microbiological evaluation of the effect of Lactobacillus reuteri in the treatment of mucositis and peri-implantitis: A triple-blind randomized clinical trial[J]. J Periodontal Res, 2018, 53 (3): 378- 390.
22 Mombelli A . Maintenance therapy for teeth and implants[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2019, 79 (1): 190- 199.
23 Berglundh T , Jepsen S , Stadlinger B , et al. Peri-implantitis and its prevention[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2019, 30 (2): 150- 155.
24 Mombelli A . Microbial colonization of the periodontal pocket and its significance for periodontal therapy[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2018, 76 (1): 85- 96.
Outlines

/