Reversibility of experimental peri-implant mucositis compared with experimental gingivitis in humans

Objective: To monitor clinical, microbiological and host‐derived alterations occurring around teeth and titanium implants during the development of experimental gingivitis/mucositis and their respective healing sequence in humans. Material and methods: Fifteen subjects with healthy or treated period...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inClinical oral implants research Vol. 23; no. 2; pp. 182 - 190
Main Authors Salvi, Giovanni E., Aglietta, Marco, Eick, Sigrun, Sculean, Anton, Lang, Niklaus P., Ramseier, Christoph A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.02.2012
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Objective: To monitor clinical, microbiological and host‐derived alterations occurring around teeth and titanium implants during the development of experimental gingivitis/mucositis and their respective healing sequence in humans. Material and methods: Fifteen subjects with healthy or treated periodontal conditions and restored with dental implants underwent an experimental 3‐week period of undisturbed plaque accumulation in the mandible. Subsequently, a 3‐week period with optimal plaque control was instituted. At Days 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42, the presence/absence of plaque deposits around teeth and implants was assessed, (plaque index [PlI]) and the gingival/mucosal conditions were evaluated (gingival index[GI]). Subgingival/submucosal plaque samples and gingival/mucosal crevicular fluid (CF) samples were collected from two pre‐determined sites around each experimental unit. CF samples were analyzed for matrix‐metalloproteinase‐8 (MMP‐8) and interleukin‐1beta (IL‐1β). Microbial samples were analyzed using DNA–DNA hybridization for 40 species. Results: During 3 weeks of plaque accumulation, the median PlI and GI increased significantly at implants and teeth. Implant sites yielded a greater increase in the median GI compared with tooth sites. Over the 6‐week experimental period, the CF levels of MMP‐8 were statistically significantly higher at implants compared with teeth (P<0.05). The CF IL‐1β levels did not differ statistically significantly between teeth and implants (P>0.05). No differences in the total DNA counts between implant and tooth sites were found at any time points. No differences in the detection frequency were found for putative periodontal pathogens between implant and tooth sites. Conclusion: Peri‐implant soft tissues developed a stronger inflammatory response to experimental plaque accumulation when compared with that of their gingival counterparts. Experimental gingivitis and peri‐implant mucositis were reversible at the biomarker level. Clinically, however, 3 weeks of resumed plaque control did not yield pre‐experimental levels of gingival and peri‐implant mucosal health indicating that longer healing periods are needed. To cite this article:
Salvi GE, Aglietta M, Eick S, Sculean A, Lang NP & Ramseier CA. Reversibility of experimental peri‐implant mucositis compared with experimental gingivitis in humans.
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 23, 2012; 182–190. 
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2011.02220.x
Bibliography:istex:D9EBE4D727B6D8B57D6A551FB16DDF4D544F415E
ark:/67375/WNG-69K6R42S-L
ArticleID:CLR2220
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0905-7161
1600-0501
1600-0501
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02220.x