Detection of bacterial species involved in perimplantitis concerned with cultural and RT-PCR

Abstract

Dental implants offer new treatment options for edentulous either partially or completely, now represent a viable alternative to conventional fixed protheses. Dental implants are colonized by a flora dominated by Gram-positive facultative aerobic, while in patients with bone loss and formation of pockets peri-implant diseases was found a significant difference in the composition of microflora, bacteria, Gram-negative anaerobes in particular Fusobacterium spp., Treponema denticola (Spirochetes), Tannerella forsythensis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Prevotella intermedia as interim black-pigmented bacteria, Porphyromonas gingivalis, often in high concentrations. Aims. The purpose of this study was to identify those at risk of perimplantitis using 2 techniques: RT-PCR examination of trade and culture. The results were compared taking into consideration the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Materials and methods.We studied 24 patients (14 women and 10 men), aged, women between 43 and 76 years, with an average of 63.8 + / - 10.9 years, men between 45 and 88 years with a average of 64.3 years + / - 12.5 years. Was performed a double levy of sub-gingival plaque at multiple sites that had an implant CAL (clinical attachment level)> 4mm in order to assess the microbiological identification with the two techniques: Examining culture and Real-Time PCR of Commerce ( Gum-Sunstar) that identifies 4 bacterial species: A. actinomycetemcomitans (A.a.), P.gingivalis (P.g.), T.forsythensis (T.f.), and T.denticola (T.d.). Results. All patients studied were positive to both tests with charger high: the consideration of tenure, with CFU / ml > 105, was positive in 66.6% of samples by:T.f., and P.g., in 12.5% for A.a., while T.d. not been sought by examining culture, the RT-PCR was positive, with high loads, in 95.8% of samples for T.f., in 79.1% for P.g., in 12.5% for A.a. and 20.8% for T.d.The test crop showed the presence of even P.intermedia in 91.6% of the samples, as well as Capnocytophaga spp. in 54.1%, F.nucleatum spp. in 50% and Campylobacter spp. 25%. Conclusions.The data show that RT-PCR has greater sensitivity than culture examination as well as response times are in favor of RT-PCR, but the kits Trade identify a limited number of species present no bacterial resistance if it were taking antibiotics.There are several factors (genetic, environmental and systemic diseases) of the subject that may affect the results of microbiological contamination. It is perhaps for this reason that many dentists often consider the microbiological examination of “unsafe” because there are not always matching the survey clinical microbiological examination then the same situation microbiological not always the same clinical situation. Being able to pinpoint those responsible for periodontal infection and inflammation, however, offers the opportunity to vary quite rightly, on the basis of virulence factors and evaluation of bacteria, the timing of recalls for the TPS (periodontal therapy support), leaving as a last choice antibiotic therapy targeted.

Keywords

• periodontitis, implant dentistry, cultural, RT-PCR