Volume 17, Issue 1 pp. 18-24

Comparisons of bacterial patterns present at implant and tooth sites in subjects on supportive periodontal therapy

I. Impact of clinical variables, gender and smoking

Mette R. Agerbaek

Mette R. Agerbaek

Department of Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
Niklaus P. Lang

Niklaus P. Lang

Department of Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
G. Rutger Persson

G. Rutger Persson

Department of Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Departments of Periodontics, and Oral Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 22 November 2005
Citations: 27
Correspondence to:
G. Rutger Persson
Department of Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics
Division of Oral Microbiology
School of Dental Medicine
University of Bern
Freiburgstrasse 7, CH 3010 Bern Switzerland
Tel.: 41 31 632 2542
Fax: 41 31 632 8608
e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Objective: (I) To compare the oral microflora at implant and tooth sites in subjects participating in a periodontal recall program, (II) to test whether the microflora at implant and tooth sites differ as an effect of gingival bleeding (bleeding on probing (BOP)), or pocket probing depth (PPD), and (III) to test whether smoking and gender had an impact on the microflora.

Material and methods: Data were collected from 127 implants and all teeth in 56 subjects. Microbiological data were identified by the DNA–DNA checkerboard hybridization.

Results: PPD≥4 mm were found in 16.9% of tooth, and at 26.6% of implant sites (P<0.01). Tooth sites with PPD≥4 mm had a 3.1-fold higher bacterial load than implant sites (mean difference: 66%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 40.7–91.3, P<0.001). No differences were found for the red, orange, green, and yellow complexes. A higher total bacterial load was found at implant sites with PPD≥4 mm (mean difference 35.7 × 105, 95% CI: 5.2 (105) to 66.1 (105), P<0.02 with equal variance not assumed). At implant sites, BOP had no impact on bacterial load but influenced the load at tooth sites (P<0.01).

Conclusion: BOP, and smoking had no impact on bacteria at implant sites but influenced the bacterial load at tooth sites. Tooth sites harbored more bacteria than implant sites with comparable PPD. The 4 mm PPD cutoff level influenced the distribution and amounts of bacterial loads. The subject factor is explanatory to bacterial load at both tooth and implant sites.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.