PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
The aim of present study is to evaluate the influence of adjacent tooth to the microbiology of clinically healthy implant. Control group included patients who had clinically healthy implant and tooth with healthy periodontium(PD≤3mm), test group was composed of patients who had clinically healthy implant and tooth with periodontal pocket(PD>3mm). The criteria of clinically health implant are no pain or discomfort, the restorative suprastructure provide satisfactory fit and function, and the tissue around the fixtures were firm and probing with standard periodontal probe with a rounded tip 0.5mm in diameter resulted in penetration of no more than 5mm when using a force of 0.5N at any location. 38 patients, partially edentulous subjects with endosseous root-form implants were selected. All subjects were medically healthy and had not taken systemic antibiotics and professional plaque control 3 months before sampling. Number of control group is 25(mean age 52±13, 26 teeth, 34 implants) and test group is 13(mean age 60±13, 13 teeth, 17 implants).
All teeth and implants of each patient were examined probing depth(PD), bleeding on probing(BOP), and plaque index(PI), and samples of subgingival plaque were obtained at each site with sterile curet or fine paper points, then the plaque transferred to PBS. Obtained samples were examined for the presence of P. gingivalis, T. forsythensis, and T. denticola by the polymerase chain reaction(PCR).
The relationship among clinical parameters and the colonizations by the 3 bacterial species from natural teeth and implants region were analyzed by student t-test.
The results of this study were as follows:
1. PD was different in teeth between 2 groups(p<0.05), but the other parameters were not.
2. Statistically significant difference was not found in clinical parameters of implants between 2 groups.
3. All bacterial prevalences of teeth were higher in test group than in control group, and prevalence of T. forsythensis had statistically significant difference between 2 groups(p<0.05).
4. Prevalences of P. gingivalis and T. forsythensis are higher in test group than control group, and that of T. denticola is higher in control group than in test group. But there were no statistically significant differences between 2 groups.
In conclusion, there is no statistically significant difference in prevalence of implant microbiology between 2 groups. But if the number of samples increased, it will be possible to find out statistical significance in prevalence of P. gingivalis. It seems that pocket of adjacent tooth influences prevalence of P. gingivalis. These results mean that improvement of the periodontal condition before implantation is very important.
XML Download