Graphical Abstract Highlights d Large-scale metagenomic assembly uncovered thousands of new human microbiome species d The new genome resource increases the mappability of gut metagenomes over 87% d Some of the newly discovered species comprise thousands of reconstructed genomes d Non-Westernized populations harbor a large fraction of the newly discovered species SUMMARYThe body-wide human microbiome plays a role in health, but its full diversity remains uncharacterized, particularly outside of the gut and in international populations. We leveraged 9,428 metagenomes to reconstruct 154,723 microbial genomes (45% of high quality) spanning body sites, ages, countries, and lifestyles. We recapitulated 4,930 species-level genome bins (SGBs), 77% without genomes in public repositories (unknown SGBs [uSGBs]). uSGBs are prevalent (in 93% of well-assembled samples), expand underrepresented phyla, and are enriched in non-Westernized populations (40% of the total SGBs). We annotated 2.85 M genes in SGBs, many associated with conditions including infant development (94,000) or Westernization (106,000). SGBs and uSGBs permit deeper microbiome analyses and increase the average mappability of metagenomic reads from 67.76% to 87.51% in the gut (median 94.26%) and 65.14% to 82.34% in the mouth. We thus identify thousands of microbial genomes from yet-to-be-named species, expand the pangenomes of human-associated microbes, and allow better exploitation of metagenomic technologies.
Within the limitations of this systematic review, it can be concluded that crestal bone levels are better maintained in the short-medium term when internal kinds of interface are adopted. In particular, conical connections seem to be more advantageous, showing lower peri-implant bone loss, but further studies are necessary to investigate the efficacy of implant-abutment connection on stability of crestal bone levels.
This prospective cohort study revealed that SPS implants offer a predictable solution for implant prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with edentulism characterized by different alveolar bone atrophy. From the biomechanical point of view, the C/I ratio would appear to be the main parameter capable of influencing implant success and crestal bone loss. Consequently, it is important not to exceed the threshold values in order to avoid excessive stress at the bone-implant interface capable of resulting in excessive crestal bone loss or implant failure.
Objective To evaluate the potential benefit of the use of a bone substitute material in the reconstructive surgical therapy of peri‐implantitis. Methods In this multicenter randomized clinical trial, 138 patients (147 implants) with peri‐implantitis were treated surgically, randomized by coin toss to either a control (access flap surgery) or a test group (reconstructive surgery using bone substitute material). Clinical assessments, including probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding and suppuration on probing (BOP & SOP) as well as soft tissue recession (REC), were recorded at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Marginal bone levels (MBL), measured on intra‐oral radiographs, and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline and 12 months. No blinding to group allocation was performed. The primary outcome at 12 months was a composite measure including (i) implant not lost, (ii) absence of BOP/SOP at all aspects, (iii) PPD ≤5 mm at all aspects and (iv) ≤1 mm recession of mucosal margin on the buccal aspect of the implant. Secondary outcomes included (i) changes of MBL, (ii) changes of PPD, BOP%, and buccal KM, (iii) buccal REC and (iv) patient‐reported outcomes. Results During follow‐up, four implants (one in the test group, three in the control group) in four patients were removed due to disease progression. At 12 months, a total of 69 implants in the test and 68 implants in the control group were examined. Thus, 16.4% and 13.5% of implants in the test and control group, respectively, met all predefined criteria of the composite outcome. PPD reduction and MBL gain were 3.7 mm and about 1.0 mm in both groups. Reduction in mean BOP% varied between 45% (test) and 50% (control), without significant differences between groups. Buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group (M = 0.7, SD = 0.9 mm) when compared to controls (M = 1.1, SD = 1.5 mm). PROs were favorable in both groups without significant differences. One case of allergic reaction to the antibiotic therapy was recorded. No other adverse events were noted. Conclusions Surgical therapy of peri‐implantitis effectively improved the clinical and radiographic status at 12 months. While the use of a bone substitute material did not improve reductions of PPD and BOP, buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups.
Dental implants are installed in an increasing number of patients. Mucositis and peri-implantitis are common microbial–biofilm-associated diseases affecting the tissues that surround the dental implant and are a major medical and socioeconomic burden. By metagenomic sequencing of the plaque microbiome in different peri-implant health and disease conditions (113 samples from 72 individuals), we found microbial signatures for peri-implantitis and mucositis and defined the peri-implantitis-related complex (PiRC) composed by the 7 most discriminative bacteria. The peri-implantitis microbiome is site specific as contralateral healthy sites resembled more the microbiome of healthy implants, while mucositis was specifically enriched for Fusobacterium nucleatum acting as a keystone colonizer. Microbiome-based machine learning showed high diagnostic and prognostic power for peri-implant diseases and strain-level profiling identified a previously uncharacterized subspecies of F. nucleatum to be particularly associated with disease. Altogether, we associated the plaque microbiome with peri-implant diseases and identified microbial signatures of disease severity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.