4.5 Article

Comparison of bacterial plaque samples from titanium implant and tooth surfaces by different methods

期刊

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 1-7

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01197.x

关键词

biofilm; DNA-DNA hybridization; sampling method; titanium implant; tooth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies have shown similarities in the microflora between titanium implants or tooth sites when samples are taken by gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) sampling methods. The purpose of the present study was to study the microflora from curette and GCF samples using the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization method to assess the microflora of patients who had at least one oral osseo-integrated implant and who were otherwise dentate. Plaque samples were taken from tooth/implant surfaces and from sulcular gingival surfaces with curettes, and from gingival fluid using filter papers. A total of 28 subjects (11 females) were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the subjects was 64.1 years (SD +/- 4.7). On average, the implants studied had been in function for 3.7 years (SD +/- 2.9). The proportion of Streptococcus oralis (P < 0.02) and Fusobacterium periodonticum (P < 0.02) was significantly higher at tooth sites (curette samples). The GCF samples yielded higher proportions for 28/40 species studies (P-values varying between 0.05 and 0.001). The proportions of Tannerella forsythia (T. forsythensis), and Treponema denticola were both higher in GCF samples (P < 0.02 and P < 0.05, respectively) than in curette samples (implant sites). The microbial composition in gingival fluid from samples taken at implant sites differed partly from that of curette samples taken from implant surfaces or from sulcular soft tissues, providing higher counts for most bacteria studied at implant surfaces, but with the exception of Porphyromonas gingivalis. A combination of GCF and curette sampling methods might be the most representative sample method.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据