A New Strategy Against Peri-Implantitis: Antibacterial Internal Coating

Francesco Carinci, Dorina Lauritano, Carlo Alberto Bignozzi, Daniele Pazzi, Valentina Candotto, Paulo Santos de Oliveira, Antonio Scarano, Francesco Carinci, Dorina Lauritano, Carlo Alberto Bignozzi, Daniele Pazzi, Valentina Candotto, Paulo Santos de Oliveira, Antonio Scarano

Abstract

The bacterial biofilm formation in the oral cavity and the microbial activity around the implant tissue represent a potential factor on the interface between bone and implant fixture that could induce an inflammatory phenomenon and generate an increased risk for mucositis and peri-implantitis. The aim of the present clinical trial was to investigate the bacterial quality of a new antibacterial coating of the internal chamber of the implant in vivo at six months. The PIXIT implant (Edierre srl, Genova Italy) is prepared by coating the implant with an alcoholic solution containing polysiloxane oligomers and chlorhexidine gluconate at 1%. A total of 15 healthy patients (60 implants) with non-contributory past medical history (nine women and six men, all non-smokers, mean age of 53 years, ranging from 45-61 years) were scheduled to receive bilateral fixed prostheses or crown restorations supported by an implant fixture. No adverse effects and no implant failure were reported at four months. All experimental sites showed a good soft tissue healing at the experimental point times and no local evidence of inflammation was observed. Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) analysis on coated and uncoated implants showed a decrease of the bacterial count in the internal part of the implant chamber. The mean of total bacteria loading (TBL) detected in each PCR reaction was lower in treated implants (81038 units/reaction) compared to untreated implants (90057 units/reaction) (p < 0.01). The polymeric chlorhexydine coating of the internal chamber of the implant showed the ability to control the bacterial loading at the level of the peri-implant tissue. Moreover, the investigation demonstrated that the coating is able to influence also the quality of the microbiota, in particular on the species involved in the pathogenesis of peri-implantitis that are involved with a higher risk of long-term failure of the dental implant restoration.

Keywords: bacterial loading; chlorhexidine gluconate; coating; implant dentistry; peri-implantitis.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Internal chamber of the fixtures of untreated (left) and treated (right) with the alcoholic solution containing polysiloxane oligomers and chlorhexidine gluconate at 1% (PIXIT) showing that the coating does not change the internal thickness.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Control (left) and test (right) healing cups showing the absence of microbial growth in the presence of a contamination of the order of 1–5 × 104 cfu of gram positive, gram negative, and Candida.

References

    1. Glauser R., Zembic A., Hammerle C.H.F. A systematic review of marginal soft tissue at implants subjected to immediate loading or immediate restoration. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2006;17:82–92. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01355.x.
    1. Nielsen H.B., Schou S., Isidor F., Christensen A.E., Starch-Jensen T. Short implants (≤8 mm) compared to standard length implants (>8 mm) in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2019;48:239–249. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.05.010.
    1. Albrektsson T., Berglundh T., Lindhe J. Osseointegration: Historic background and current concepts. Clin. Periodontol. Implant Dent. 2003;4:809–820.
    1. Adell R., Lekholm U., Rockler B., Brånemark P.I. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int. J. Oral Surg. 1981;10:387–416. doi: 10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4.
    1. Zanolla J., Amado F.M., da Silva W.S., Ayub B., de Almeida A.L.P.F., Soares S. Success rate in implant-supported overdenture and implant-supported fixed denture in cleft lip and palate patients. Ann. Maxillofac. Surg. 2016;6:223–227.
    1. Rotundo R., Pagliaro U., Bendinelli E., Esposito M., Buti J. Long-term outcomes of soft tissue augmentation around dental implants on soft and hard tissue stability: a systematic review. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2015;26:123–138. doi: 10.1111/clr.12629.
    1. Lee C.T., Huang Y.W., Zhu L., Weltman R. Prevalences of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Dent. 2017;62:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.04.011.
    1. Piattelli A., Vrespa G., Petrone G., Iezzi G., Annibali S., Scarano A. Role of the microgap between implant and abutment: A retrospective histologic evaluation in monkeys. J. Periodontol. 2003;74:346–352. doi: 10.1902/jop.2003.74.3.346.
    1. Scarano A., Valbonetti L., Degidi M., Pecci R., Piattelli A., de Oliveira P.S., Perrotti V. Implant-abutment contact surfaces and microgap measurements of different implant connections under 3-dimensional X-ray microtomography. Implant Dent. 2016;25:656–662. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000465.
    1. Scarano A., Lorusso C., Di Giulio C., Mazzatenta A. Evaluation of the sealing capability of the implant healing screw by using real time volatile organic compounds analysis: internal hexagon versus cone morse. J. Periodontol. 2016;87:1492–1498. doi: 10.1902/jop.2016.160076.
    1. Konstantinidis I.K., Kotsakis G.A., Gerdes S., Walter M.H. Cross-sectional study on the prevalence and risk indicators of peri-implant diseases. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2015;8:75–88.
    1. Schwarz F., Derks J., Monje A., Wang H.L. Peri-implantitis. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2018;45:S246–S266. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12954.
    1. Canullo L., Schlee M., Wagner W., Covani U. International brainstorming meeting on etiologic and risk factors of peri-implantitis, Montegrotto (Padua, Italy), August 2014. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2015;30:1093–1104. doi: 10.11607/jomi.4386.
    1. Cosyn J., Van Aelst L., Collaert B., Persson G.R., De Bruyn H. The peri-implant sulcus compared with internal implant and suprastructure components: A microbiological analysis. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2011;13:286–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00220.x.
    1. Lauritano D., Bignozzi C.A., Pazzi D., Cura F., Carinci F. Efficacy of a new coating of implant-abutment connections in reducing bacterial loading: an in vitro study. Oral Implant. 2017;10:1–10. doi: 10.11138/orl/2017.10.1.001.
    1. Insua A., Monje A., Wang H.L., Miron R.J. Basis of bone metabolism around dental implants during osseointegration and peri-implant bone loss. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A. 2017;105:2075–2089. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.36060.
    1. Zechner W., Kneissel M., Kim S., Ulm C., Watzek G., Plenk H. Histomorphometrical and clinical comparison of submerged and nonsubmerged implants subjected to experimental peri-implantitis in dogs. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2004;15:23–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00984.x.
    1. Qian J., Wennerberg A., Albrektsson T. Reasons for marginal bone loss around oral implants. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2012;14:792–807. doi: 10.1111/cid.12014.
    1. Tallarico M., Canullo L., Caneva M., Özcan M. Microbial colonization at the implant-abutment interface and its possible influence on periimplantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Prosthodont. Res. 2017;61:233–241. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2017.03.001.
    1. Göthberg C., Gröndahl K., Omar O., Thomsen P., Slotte C. Bone and soft tissue outcomes, risk factors, and complications of implant-supported prostheses: 5-Years RCT with different abutment types and loading protocols. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2018;20:313–321. doi: 10.1111/cid.12587.
    1. Sasada Y., Cochran D.L. Implant-abutment connections: A review of biologic consequences and peri-implantitis implications. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2017;32:1296–1307. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5732.
    1. Mencio F., De Angelis F., Papi P., Rosella D., Pompa G., Di Carlo S. A randomized clinical trial about presence of pathogenic microflora and risk of peri-implantitis: comparison of two different types of implant-abutment connections. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2017;21:1443–1451.
    1. Piñeiro A., Tomás I., Blanco J., Alvarez M., Seoane J., Diz P. Bacteraemia following dental implants’ placement. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2010;21:913–918. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01928.x.
    1. Surapaneni H., Yalamanchili P.S., Basha M.H., Potluri S., Elisetti N., Kiran Kumar M.V. Antibiotics in dental implants: A review of literature. J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 2016;8:S28–S31.
    1. Gupta D.M., Boland R.J., Aron D.C. The physicians experience of changing clinical practice: A struggle to unlearn. Implement. Sci. 2017;12:18. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0555-2.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner