CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing

Assessing peri-implant bacterial community structure: the effect of microbiome sample collection method

Open access
Anitua, Eduardo, Murias-Freijo, Alia, Tierno, Roberto, Tejero, Ricardo, Alkhraisat, Mohammad Hamdan·2024·BMC Oral Health
DOI 10.1186/s12903-024-04675-yPMC PMC11348724

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oral microbiota comprises polymicrobial communities shaped by mutualistic coevolution with the host, contributing to homeostasis and regulating immune function. Nevertheless, dysbiosis of oral bacterial communities is associated with a number of clinical symptoms that ranges from infections to oral cancer. Peri-implant diseases are biofilm-associated inflammatory conditions affecting the soft and hard tissues around dental implants. Characterization and identification of the biofilm community are essential for the understanding of the pathophysiology of such diseases. For that sampling methods should be representative of the biofilm communities Therefore, there is a need to know the effect of different sampling strategies on the biofilm characterization by next generation sequencing. METHODS: With the aim of selecting an appropriate microbiome sampling procedure for periimplant biofilms, next generation sequencing was used for characterizing the bacterial communities obtained by three different sampling strategies two months after transepithelial abutment placement: adjacent periodontal crevicular fluid (ToCF), crevicular fluid from transepithelial abutment (TACF) and transepithelial abutment (TA). RESULTS: Significant differences in multiple alpha diversity indices were detected at both the OTU and the genus level between different sampling procedures. Differentially abundant taxa were detected between sample collection strategies, including peri-implant health and disease related taxa. At the community level significant differences were also detected between TACF and TA and also between TA and ToCF. Moreover, differential network properties and association patterns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The selection of sample collection strategy can significantly affect the community composition and structure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This research is part of a randomized clinical trial that was designed to assess the effect of transepithelial abutment surface on the biofilm formation. The trial was registered at Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT03554876.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12903-024-04675-y

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Short-term adhesion or wound closure results obtained under simplified experimental conditions may not directly predict long-term mucosal retention, peri-implant soft tissue sealing, or clinical healing outcomes.

    “Therefore, short-term adhesion or wound closure results obtained under simplified experimental conditions may not directly predict long-term mucosal retention, peri-implant soft tissue sealing, or clinical healing outcomes.61,62”

    From Polydopamine-Based Biomaterials in Oral Medicine: Applications, Mechanisms, and Translational Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Background and Conclusions (pages unavailable) compare methods for sampling peri-implant bacterial communities and find that crevicular-fluid samples are often not representative of communities on abutment surfaces. Searches for wound closure, mucosal sealing, tissue retention, and prediction of clinical healing found no passage addressing whether short-term experimental results predict those outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Cell culture, antibacterial adhesion assays, and mucosal/wound healing models indicate that PDA-based coatings or hydrogels can improve wet adhesion, antioxidative protection, localized drug delivery, inflammation regulation, and wound healing.

    “Cell culture, antibacterial adhesion assays, and mucosal/wound healing models indicate that PDA-based coatings or hydrogels can improve wet adhesion, antioxidative protection, localized drug delivery, inflammation regulation, and wound healing.”

    From Polydopamine-Based Biomaterials in Oral Medicine: Applications, Mechanisms, and Translational Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Background and Methods describe comparing peri-implant microbiome sampling strategies, not testing PDA-based coatings or hydrogels. Searches for PDA-based wet adhesion, drug delivery, polydopamine, and wound healing found no passage addressing the claimed effects. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [2]Aitchison J. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data, Chapman and Hall, reprinted in 2003 with additional material by The Blackburn Press. 1986.
  2. [113]Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Anitua, E., Murias-Freijo, A., Tierno, R., Tejero, R., & Alkhraisat, M. H.
Affiliations
University of the Basque Country (ES)
Corresponding author
Anitua, Eduardo
ORCID
Venue
BMC Oral Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-08-26
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
1001-1001
ISSN
1472-6831 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12903-024-04675-y
PMC
PMC11348724
OpenAlex
W4401886198
Cited by
7
References
120
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1
FWCI
3.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Oral Health (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
  • European Regional Development Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Keywords
peri-implant biofilm, dental implants, oral microbiota, sample collection methods, bacterial community structure, alpha diversity, differentially abundant taxa, microbial co-occurrence networks, peri-implant disease
MeSH terms
Aged, Bacteria, Female, Gingival Crevicular Fluid, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Specimen Handling, Dental Implants, Biofilms, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, Microbiota

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review