File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

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

TitleComparison of bacterial plaque samples from titanium implant and tooth surfaces by different methods
Authors
Issue Date2006
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLR
Citation
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2006, v. 17 n. 1, p. 1-7 How to Cite?
AbstractStudies 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. Copyright © Blackwell Munksgaard 2006.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154391
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.464
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.427
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGerber, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorWenaweser, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorHeitzMayfield, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorLang, NPen_US
dc.contributor.authorRutger Persson, Gen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:25:03Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:25:03Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 2006, v. 17 n. 1, p. 1-7en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154391-
dc.description.abstractStudies 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. Copyright © Blackwell Munksgaard 2006.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLRen_US
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Researchen_US
dc.subject.meshBacteroides - Isolation & Purificationen_US
dc.subject.meshColony Count, Microbialen_US
dc.subject.meshCross-Sectional Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshDna, Bacterial - Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implants - Microbiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Plaque - Microbiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshGingival Crevicular Fluid - Microbiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshNucleic Acid Hybridization - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshPorphyromonas Gingivalis - Isolation & Purificationen_US
dc.subject.meshSpecimen Handling - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshStatistics, Nonparametricen_US
dc.subject.meshStreptococcus Oralis - Isolation & Purificationen_US
dc.subject.meshSubgingival Curettageen_US
dc.subject.meshTitaniumen_US
dc.subject.meshTooth Root - Microbiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshTreponema Denticola - Isolation & Purificationen_US
dc.titleComparison of bacterial plaque samples from titanium implant and tooth surfaces by different methodsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLang, NP:nplang@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLang, NP=rp00031en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01197.xen_US
dc.identifier.pmid16441779-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33645047674en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33645047674&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume17en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage1en_US
dc.identifier.epage7en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000234854400001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGerber, J=12787506800en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWenaweser, D=12786525100en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHeitzMayfield, L=6602309146en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLang, NP=7201577367en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRutger Persson, G=6507743898en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike479722-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats