Synthetic anti-endotoxin peptides interfere with Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, their adhesion and biofilm formation on titanium.

AIMS: Implant-associated infections arise from the formation of bacterial biofilms, which are difficult to be treated with conventional antibiotics. Therefore, there is a need for new implant functionalizations, which inhibit biofilm formation. The aim of the present study was to characterize the effect of synthetic peptides to assess their applicability for this purpose. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two synthetic anti-endotoxin peptides, Pep19-2.5 and Pep19-4LF (Aspidasept I and II) were tested against both Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus oralis) and Gram-negative (Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans) bacteria associated with implant infections. Their activity was evaluated against different states of biofilm formation on the implant material titanium using CFU, live/dead fluorescence staining and confocal microscopy. Both peptides inhibited planktonic bacteria growth, impacted initial bacterial adhesion, reduced biofilm volume and increased the proportion of dead cells. Additionally, cytotoxicity analyses showed that neither peptide harmed human gingival fibroblasts nor osteoblasts at lower concentrations. CONCLUSION: A concentration-dependent antibacterial activity of both peptides against biofilms of four clinically relevant bacteria could be demonstrated. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The results of this study serve as a promising basis for the improvement of these peptides in order to finally achieve a peptide-equipped antibacterial implant surface.

Epidemiology and risk factors of peri-implantitis: A systematic review.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the prevalence, incidence and risk factors of peri-implantitis in the current literature. An electronic search was performed to identify publications from January 1980 until March 2016 on 9 databases. The prevalence and incidence of peri-implantitis were assessed in different subgroups of patients and the prevalences were adjusted for sample size (SSA) of studies. For 12 of 111 identified putative risk factors and risk indicators, forest plots were created. Heterogeneity analysis and random effect meta-analysis were performed for selected potential risk factors of peri-implantitis. The search retrieved 8357 potentially relevant studies. Fifty-seven studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, the prevalence of peri-implantitis on implant level ranged from 1.1% to 85.0% and the incidence from 0.4% within 3 years, to 43.9% within 5 years, respectively. The median prevalence of peri-implantitis was 9.0% (SSA 10.9%) for regular participants of a prophylaxis program, 18.8% (SSA 8.8%) for patients without regular preventive maintenance, 11.0% (SSA 7.4%) for non-smokers, 7.0% (SSA 7.0%) among patients representing the general population, 9.6% (SSA 9.6%) for patients provided with fixed partial dentures, 14.3% (SSA 9.8%) for subjects with a history of periodontitis, 26.0% (SSA 28.8%) for patients with implant function time ≥5 years and 21.2% (SSA 38.4%) for ≥10 years. On a medium and medium-high level of evidence, smoking (effect summary OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.25-2.3), diabetes mellitus (effect summary OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.4-4.5), lack of prophylaxis and history or presence of periodontitis were identified as risk factors of peri-implantitis. There is medium-high evidence that patient's age (effect summary OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.87-1.16), gender and maxillary implants are not related to peri-implantitis. Currently, there is no convincing or low evidence available that identifies osteoporosis, absence of keratinized mucosa, implant surface characteristics or edentulism as risk factors for peri-implantitis. Based on the data analyzed in this systematic review, insufficient high-quality evidence is available to the research question. Future studies of prospective, randomized and controlled type including sufficient sample sizes are needed. The application of consistent diagnostic criteria (eg, according to the latest definition by the European Workshop on Periodontology) is particularly important. Very few studies evaluated the incidence of peri-implantitis; however, this study design may contribute to examine further the potential risk factors.

Pain and discomfort following immediate and delayed loading by overdentures in the single mandibular implant study (SMIS).

OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial compares immediate and delayed loading of single implants to support mandibular overdentures. The aim of this preliminary analysis is to test the hypothesis whether patients with immediate loading will experience less pain and discomfort through the intervention than patients with delayed loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Edentulous patients in nine German dental schools received a midline implant with a length of 11 mm. Implants with a minimum insertion torque of 30 Ncm and an implant stability quotient of ≥60 were randomly allocated to group A for immediate loading using ball attachments or to group B for delayed loading after 3 months. Patients completed questionnaires with 100-mm visual analogue scales about the items pain, pain during chewing, swelling, bleeding, and perception of the intervention at the day of surgery and 1, 2, 3, and 7 days, thereafter. Groups were compared by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests (P ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: The questionnaires of 81 patients in group A and 74 patients in group B were completed. The medians for pain and discomfort were moderate (<30). Participants of group A felt significantly more pain from the first day and more swelling from the third day after implantation than participants of group B. The individual perception of interventions showed no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate loading evoked more postoperative pain and swelling than the two stages of delayed loading. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Immediate loading of a single mandibular midline implant supporting overdentures should be carefully considered.

Expression of antimicrobial peptides and interleukin-8 during early stages of inflammation: An experimental gingivitis study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In the oral cavity, the epithelial surface is constantly exposed to a number of different microorganisms that are organized in a well-structured biofilm. The aim of this study was to monitor gingival expression of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) and interleukin-8 (IL-8) in an early gingivitis model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Experimental gingivitis was allowed to develop in healthy volunteers (n = 17). Bleeding on probing (BOP%) and gingival crevicular fluid volume (GCF) were assessed at baseline and day 1, 3, 5, 7 and 14. Expression of AMPs (human beta-defensin-2, hBD-2; CC-chemokine ligand 20, CCL20; psoriasin, pso/S100A7) and IL-8 was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in gingival biopsies. In addition, hBD-2 and IL-8 protein expression was monitored in GCF using the ELISA technology. RESULTS: Experimental gingivitis gradually developed with an increase in BOP scores and GCF volume over time. In GCF, elevated concentrations of hBD-2 and IL-8 were monitored at day 1, 5 and 7 (p ≤ 0.0002). Immunohistochemical analysis of gingival sections demonstrated increased staining for hBD-2 at day 3, whereas the CCL20, pso/S100A7, and IL-8 expression was increased at later time points (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For the first time, this study showed the time-dependent regulation of AMPs, following clinical signs of experimentally induced gingival inflammation. Differential temporal expression for AMPs may ensure a constant antimicrobial activity against changes in the bacterial composition of the growing dental biofilm.

[Clinical symptoms and diagnostic workup of allergic reactions on the oral mucosa]. / Klinische Symptomatik und Diagnostik allergischer Reaktionen der Mundschleimhaut.

Contact allergies at the oral mucosa are associated with diverse symptoms. In this article we focus on the contact allergy of delayed type. Oral mucosa changes including stomatitis or lichenoid inflammation can give first evidence for such a contact allergy. Subjective symptoms including pain, burning or dryness of the oral mucosa can be associated with a contact allergy but may also occur in other diseases which need to be excluded. The first step in the diagnosis of a contact allergy is the complete examination of the oral mucosa. Additionally, a careful history of the patient's oral care products, drugs and dental materials is important. If mucosal changes are present, a patch test is recommended for the diagnostic work up for contact allergy of delayed type. In case of a positive patch test reaction, a careful check for the clinical relevance is needed in order to have a clear recommendation for both patient and dentist e.g. if replacement of prosthetic materials is needed.