Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIM: To compare the microbiome of healthy (H) and diseased (P) peri-implant sites and determine the core peri-implant microbiome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Submucosal biofilms from 32 H and 35 P sites were analysed using 16S rRNA sequencing (MiSeq, Illumina), QIIME and HOMINGS. Differences between groups were determined using principal coordinate analysis (PCoA), t tests and Wilcoxon rank sum test and FDR-adjusted. The peri-implant core microbiome was determined. RESULTS: PCoA showed partitioning between H and P at all taxonomic levels. Bacteroidetes, Spirochetes and Synergistetes were higher in P, while Actinobacteria prevailed in H (p < .05). Porphyromonas and Treponema were more abundant in P while Rothia and Neisseria were higher in H (p < .05). The core peri-implant microbiome contained Fusobacterium, Parvimonas and Campylobacter sp. T. denticola, and P. gingivalis levels were higher in P, as well as F. alocis, F. fastidiosum and T. maltophilum (p < .05). CONCLUSION: The peri-implantitis microbiome is commensal-depleted and pathogen-enriched, harbouring traditional and new pathogens. The core peri-implant microbiome harbours taxa from genera often associated with periodontal inflammation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sanz‐Martín et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: