Materials & methods : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (1)
The study was approved by the ethics committee of the University Medical Center Freiburg, Germany (Ethik‐Kommission Albert‐Ludwigs‐Universität, Freiburg) No 337/04. This study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, as revised in 2013 and with EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) guidelines. Before enrollment, the patients received information regarding the purpose of the study and signed an informed consent. All patients were consecutively enrolled in two study centers (Department of Oral and Craniomaxillofacial Surgery/Translational Implantology and the Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Medical Center Freiburg, Germany). Screw‐retained and cemented restorations were included. None of the patients had a known systemic disorder (e.g., diabetes mellitus) that could have affected the periodontal and peri‐implant tissue conditions.
2.1 Inclusion criteria
Soft tissue samples were taken from patients with severe peri‐implant disease around ceramic and titanium rough implants with indication for explantation, diagnosed by clinical investigation and radiographic bone destruction (bone loss of greater than two thirds of the implant length or mobility with or without suppuration) according to the definition by Lang et al. Prosthetically restored implants were included which had received the restoration >12 months prior.
2.2 Exclusion criteria
Immunosuppressed, irradiated patients or patients with current chemotherapy were excluded as well as patients aged <18 years. Nicotine users and patients with generalized active periodontal disease were excluded in the present study.
2.3 Retrieval and processing of biopsies
The retrieval of biopsies was performed as described earlier. Briefly, the biopsies were obtained at the time of surgical removal of the implant. The intervention was performed under local anesthesia with Ultracain DS forte. A circular incision and two releasing incisions mesial and distal of the implant were performed with a scalpel (15c). A mucoperiosteal flap was mobilized and a clamp and a scalpel were used to remove the inflammatory tissue as a biopsy which was histologically processed. For further processing the biopsies were fixed in 3,5% neutral buffered Formalin.
Subsequently, the biopsies were embedded in paraffin and cut with a rotary microtome into serial sections of 2‐µm thickness using the Leica microtome.
Serial posts:
- Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue around ceramic implants—A pilot study
- Introduction : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue
- Materials & methods : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (1)
- Materials & methods : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (2)
- Results : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue
- Discussion : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (1)
- Discussion : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (2)
- Discussion : Immunohistological composition of peri‐implantitis affected tissue (3)
- Figure 1. Histomorphometric analysis performed in selected ROIs
- Figure 2. Biopsies retrieved from peri‐implantitis tissue
- Figure 3. Biopsies derived from tissue around ceramic and titanium implants
- Figure 4. Stacked plot demonstrated a patient‐specific immune response
- TABLE 1. t p50, SD, minimum (min) and maximum (max) cell count for each antibody used