Joaquin Espinoza‐Arrue, Marion Arce, Natalia Endo, Anilei Hoare, Nicolas Dutzan, Loreto Abusleme
{"title":"在种植体周围条件下分析细菌微生物组","authors":"Joaquin Espinoza‐Arrue, Marion Arce, Natalia Endo, Anilei Hoare, Nicolas Dutzan, Loreto Abusleme","doi":"10.1111/jcpe.70024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AimTo comprehensively characterise the bacterial microbiome in peri‐implant health, peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis.Materials and MethodsA re‐analysis of raw microbiome data was performed from 15 studies, which were finally selected based on the availability of 16S rRNA sequencing. Reads were pre‐processed using mothur and classified using the HOMD database. A total of 522 samples were analysed to evaluate diversity estimates and bacterial relative abundance, identifying discriminant features via LEfSe, while predictions of functional potential were obtained using PICRUSt2. Bacterial co‐occurrence networks were constructed, and dysbiosis was measured by employing the subgingival microbiome dysbiosis index.ResultsPeri‐implantitis showed higher bacterial diversity compared to health and greater microbial richness than peri‐mucositis. Each clinical condition displayed a distinct community structure and bacterial co‐occurrence networks. The representative species in peri‐implant health were <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>Rothia aeria</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>R. dentocariosa</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> and <jats:italic>Veillonella parvula_dispar</jats:italic>. Peri‐mucositis is characterised by <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>Leptotrichia hongkongensis</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>L. wadei</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> and <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>Fusobacterium nucleatum</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> subsp. <jats:italic>polymorphum</jats:italic>, while peri‐implantitis is defined by <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>Porphyromonas gingivalis</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\"><jats:italic>F. nucleatum</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> subsp. <jats:italic>vincentii</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>Tannerella <jats:styled-content style=\"fixed-case\">forsythia</jats:styled-content></jats:italic>. Peri‐implantitis exhibited enrichment in predicted microbial pathogenesis pathways and greater bacterial dysbiosis.ConclusionsThese results provide deeper insights into the peri‐implant microbiome, identifying key bacterial species, functional processes and interactions that may be crucial to inflammation and destruction during peri‐implant diseases.","PeriodicalId":15380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Profiling the Bacterial Microbiome Across Peri‐Implant Conditions\",\"authors\":\"Joaquin Espinoza‐Arrue, Marion Arce, Natalia Endo, Anilei Hoare, Nicolas Dutzan, Loreto Abusleme\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcpe.70024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AimTo comprehensively characterise the bacterial microbiome in peri‐implant health, peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis.Materials and MethodsA re‐analysis of raw microbiome data was performed from 15 studies, which were finally selected based on the availability of 16S rRNA sequencing. Reads were pre‐processed using mothur and classified using the HOMD database. A total of 522 samples were analysed to evaluate diversity estimates and bacterial relative abundance, identifying discriminant features via LEfSe, while predictions of functional potential were obtained using PICRUSt2. Bacterial co‐occurrence networks were constructed, and dysbiosis was measured by employing the subgingival microbiome dysbiosis index.ResultsPeri‐implantitis showed higher bacterial diversity compared to health and greater microbial richness than peri‐mucositis. Each clinical condition displayed a distinct community structure and bacterial co‐occurrence networks. The representative species in peri‐implant health were <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>Rothia aeria</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>R. dentocariosa</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> and <jats:italic>Veillonella parvula_dispar</jats:italic>. Peri‐mucositis is characterised by <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>Leptotrichia hongkongensis</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>L. wadei</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> and <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>Fusobacterium nucleatum</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> subsp. <jats:italic>polymorphum</jats:italic>, while peri‐implantitis is defined by <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>Porphyromonas gingivalis</jats:italic></jats:styled-content>, <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\"><jats:italic>F. nucleatum</jats:italic></jats:styled-content> subsp. <jats:italic>vincentii</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>Tannerella <jats:styled-content style=\\\"fixed-case\\\">forsythia</jats:styled-content></jats:italic>. Peri‐implantitis exhibited enrichment in predicted microbial pathogenesis pathways and greater bacterial dysbiosis.ConclusionsThese results provide deeper insights into the peri‐implant microbiome, identifying key bacterial species, functional processes and interactions that may be crucial to inflammation and destruction during peri‐implant diseases.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Periodontology\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Periodontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.70024\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.70024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Profiling the Bacterial Microbiome Across Peri‐Implant Conditions
AimTo comprehensively characterise the bacterial microbiome in peri‐implant health, peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis.Materials and MethodsA re‐analysis of raw microbiome data was performed from 15 studies, which were finally selected based on the availability of 16S rRNA sequencing. Reads were pre‐processed using mothur and classified using the HOMD database. A total of 522 samples were analysed to evaluate diversity estimates and bacterial relative abundance, identifying discriminant features via LEfSe, while predictions of functional potential were obtained using PICRUSt2. Bacterial co‐occurrence networks were constructed, and dysbiosis was measured by employing the subgingival microbiome dysbiosis index.ResultsPeri‐implantitis showed higher bacterial diversity compared to health and greater microbial richness than peri‐mucositis. Each clinical condition displayed a distinct community structure and bacterial co‐occurrence networks. The representative species in peri‐implant health were Rothia aeria, R. dentocariosa and Veillonella parvula_dispar. Peri‐mucositis is characterised by Leptotrichia hongkongensis, L. wadei and Fusobacterium nucleatum subsp. polymorphum, while peri‐implantitis is defined by Porphyromonas gingivalis, F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii and Tannerella forsythia. Peri‐implantitis exhibited enrichment in predicted microbial pathogenesis pathways and greater bacterial dysbiosis.ConclusionsThese results provide deeper insights into the peri‐implant microbiome, identifying key bacterial species, functional processes and interactions that may be crucial to inflammation and destruction during peri‐implant diseases.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Clinical Periodontology was founded by the British, Dutch, French, German, Scandinavian, and Swiss Societies of Periodontology.
The aim of the Journal of Clinical Periodontology is to provide the platform for exchange of scientific and clinical progress in the field of Periodontology and allied disciplines, and to do so at the highest possible level. The Journal also aims to facilitate the application of new scientific knowledge to the daily practice of the concerned disciplines and addresses both practicing clinicians and academics. The Journal is the official publication of the European Federation of Periodontology but wishes to retain its international scope.
The Journal publishes original contributions of high scientific merit in the fields of periodontology and implant dentistry. Its scope encompasses the physiology and pathology of the periodontium, the tissue integration of dental implants, the biology and the modulation of periodontal and alveolar bone healing and regeneration, diagnosis, epidemiology, prevention and therapy of periodontal disease, the clinical aspects of tooth replacement with dental implants, and the comprehensive rehabilitation of the periodontal patient. Review articles by experts on new developments in basic and applied periodontal science and associated dental disciplines, advances in periodontal or implant techniques and procedures, and case reports which illustrate important new information are also welcome.