2019
DOI: 10.1111/cmi.13078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Commensal and pathogenic biofilms differently modulate peri‐implant oral mucosa in an organotypic model

Abstract: The impact of oral commensal and pathogenic bacteria on peri‐implant mucosa is not well understood, despite the high prevalence of peri‐implant infections. Hence, we investigated responses of the peri‐implant mucosa to Streptococcus oralis or Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans biofilms using a novel in vitro peri‐implant mucosa‐biofilm model. Our 3D model combined three components, organotypic oral mucosa, implant material, and oral biofilm, with structural assembly close to native situation. S. oralis indu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
24
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
2
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In conclusion, the neutrophil responses, NET formation, ROS production and MMPs secretion were different to the various bacterial species grown as monospecies biofilm. The commensal S. oralis induced a balance-like neutrophil response -which is consistent with the concept that commensals protect the host against the overgrowth of pathogenic bacteria and are required to maintain oral health [23,76]. The pathogenic biofilms induced different neutrophil responses.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…In conclusion, the neutrophil responses, NET formation, ROS production and MMPs secretion were different to the various bacterial species grown as monospecies biofilm. The commensal S. oralis induced a balance-like neutrophil response -which is consistent with the concept that commensals protect the host against the overgrowth of pathogenic bacteria and are required to maintain oral health [23,76]. The pathogenic biofilms induced different neutrophil responses.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Only very few studies have previously exposed RHG (but not RHS) to commensal microbes, and none have shown such well‐preserved tissue integrity after 24 hours of co‐culture. For example, a recent study described gene regulation in RHG after Streptococcus oralis biofilm exposure via a titanium implant inserted into the RHG for 24 hours; however, no data on tissue viability and limited data on tissue integrity were shown 57 . Another study described biofilm formation and invasion into the epithelial layers when exposed to streptococci and Candida albicans for 24 hours.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ingendoh-Tsakmakidis et al [ 22 ] investigated the response of peri-implant oral mucosa to oral bacterial biofilms using an in vitro, peri-implant, mucosa–biofilm model. In this study, a titanium disc (implant material) was inserted into the engineered connective tissue layer, consisting of collagen-embedded human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs), and then oral keratinocytes (OKF6/TERT-2) were added around the titanium on top of the fibroblast–collagen gel.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%