hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Mechanical non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a single-blinded randomized longitudinal clinical study. II. Microbiological results
Department of Periodontology, Clinical Dental Research Center, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3620-5978
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society.
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society. (Oral hälsa)
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society. (Oral hälsa)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0992-2362
2010 (English)In: Journal of Clinical Periodontology, ISSN 0303-6979, E-ISSN 1600-051X, Vol. 37, no 6, 563-573 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

P>Background Peri-implantitis is common in patients with dental implants. We performed a single-blinded longitudinal randomized study to assess the effects of mechanical debridement on the peri-implant microbiota in peri-implantitis lesions. Materials and Methods An expanded checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization assay encompassing 79 different microorganisms was used to study bacterial counts before and during 6 months following mechanical treatment of peri-implantitis in 17 cases treated with curettes and 14 cases treated with an ultrasonic device. Statistics included non-parametric tests and GLM multivariate analysis with p < 0001 indicating significance and 80% power. Results At selected implant test sites, the most prevalent bacteria were: Fusobacterium nucleatum sp., Staphylococci sp., Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Helicobacter pylori, and Tannerella forsythia. 30 min. after treatment with curettes, A. actinomycetemcomitans (serotype a), Lactobacillus acidophilus, Streptococcus anginosus, and Veillonella parvula were found at lower counts (p < 0.001). No such differences were found for implants treated with the ultrasonic device. Inconsistent changes occurred following the first week. No microbiological differences between baseline and 6-month samples were found for any species or between treatment study methods in peri-implantitis. Conclusions Both methods failed to eliminate or reduce bacterial counts in peri-implantitis. No group differences were found in the ability to reduce the microbiota in peri-implantitis.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 37, no 6, 563-573 p.
Keyword [en]
microbiota, peri-implantitis, S, aureus, treatment, resistant staphylococcus-aureus, titanium dental implants, dna-dna, hybridization, drug delivery-system, microbial findings, nasal, carriage, bacteria, infection, therapy, biofilm
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-7531DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01561.xISI: 000277691300010PubMedID: 20507380OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-7531DiVA: diva2:380418
Available from: 2010-12-21 Created: 2010-12-20 Last updated: 2014-09-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Persson, G. RutgerLindahl, ChristelRenvert, Stefan
By organisation
School of Health and Society
In the same journal
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 142 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf