2001
DOI: 10.1067/moe.2001.117263
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification of oral spirochetes at the species level and their association with other bacteria in endodontic infections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

3
41
0
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
3
41
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Clone library analysis corroborated previous findings from species-specific PCR (4,11,15,25,27,38,40) or checkerboard studies (26,35,46,47) in that virtually all cultivable Treponema species can be found in infections of endodontic origin. Of the 10 cultivable species, only T. pectinovorum was not detected here.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Clone library analysis corroborated previous findings from species-specific PCR (4,11,15,25,27,38,40) or checkerboard studies (26,35,46,47) in that virtually all cultivable Treponema species can be found in infections of endodontic origin. Of the 10 cultivable species, only T. pectinovorum was not detected here.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Treponema species are examples of culture-difficult bacteria that have been identified in endodontic infections only by culture-independent molecular methods (4,15,27,46). Most of the previous molecular studies focused on the detection of selected Treponema species or phylotypes (4, 11, 13, 15, 25-27, 38, 40, 43, 46).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our findings with respect to these organisms (except for P. gingivalis) agree with those in a recent report (39) in that the organisms do not seem to be associated with symptomatic cases. A recent report indicated that other oral treponemes such as Treponema maltophilum and Treponema socranskii, which were not included in this study, may be more prevalent in endodontic infections than T. denticola (30). More studies are needed to discern the contributions of all these organisms to their pathogenicities and their potential association with treatment failure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…따 라서 근관내 감염에 중요한 원인균종이 배양법에 의해서는 발견되지 않을 수 있으며, 이러한 배양법은 세균의 분리, 동 정에 시간, 노력 및 비용이 많이 드는 단점이 있다. 이 같은 배양법을 보완, 보충하기위해 1990년대 이후 다양한 분자 유전학적기술, 즉 checkerboard DNA:DNA hybridization 25) , real time-PCR 26) , 16S rRNA(DNA)gene-directed PCR 27,28) 등을 34,44) . 브라질에서 감염근관을 대상으로 16S rRNA genedirected PCR방법으로 조사한 결과 T. denticola는 임상 증상과 연관성있게 나타나는 것은 아니지만 임상증상 유무 에 관계없이 살펴봤을 때 42�52%의 높은 이환율을 보였 다 [33][34][35] .…”
unclassified