Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39268486›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024

Microbiome of diseased and healthy implants-a comprehensive microbial data analysis.

Pingyi Jia, Xinran Guo, Jinchen Ye, Hongye Lu, Jingwen Yang, Jianxia Hou

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Pingyi JiaDepartment of the Fifth Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center for Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Healty Center (NHC) Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing, China.
Xinran GuoPeking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center for Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Healty Center (NHC) Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Medical Products Administration National (NMPA) Key Laboratory for Dental Material, Beijing, China.
Jinchen YePeking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center for Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Healty Center (NHC) Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Medical Products Administration National (NMPA) Key Laboratory for Dental Material, Beijing, China.
Hongye LuStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China.
Jingwen YangDepartment of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center for Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Healty Center (NHC) Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Medical Products Administration National (NMPA) Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing, China.
Jianxia HouDepartment of Periodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center for Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Healty Center (NHC) Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology and National Medical Products Administration National (NMPA) Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this systematic bioinformatics analysis was to describe the compositions and differences in submucosal microbial profiles of peri-implants' diseases and healthy implant. Material and methods: PubMed, Embase, ETH Z, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched to screen relevant literature on the analysis of peri-implant microflora based on the sequencing analysis technique of 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) gene. High-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene of microorganisms from healthy implants, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis was downloaded from the screened articles. EasyAmplicon and Usearch global algorithm were used to match the reads from each dataset to a full length of 16S rRNA or ITS gene sequence. The microorganisms based on the Human Oral Microbiome Database (HOMD) were re-classified, and the microbial diversity, flora composition, and differential species of the samples were re-analyzed, including taxonomic classification and alpha and beta diversity calculations. The co-occurrence network was also re-analyzed. Results: A total of seven articles with 240 implants were included. Among them, 51 were healthy implants (HI), 43 were in the peri-implant mucositis (PM) group, and 146 were in the peri-implantitis (PI) group. A total of 26,483 OTUs were obtained, and 877 microorganisms were annotated. The alpha diversity including Chao1 (healthy implants, 121.04 ± 92.76; peri-implant mucositis, 128.21 ± 66.77; peri-implantitis, 131.15 ± 84.69) and Shannon (healthy implants, 3.25 ± 0.65; peri-implant mucositis, 3.73 ± 0.61; peri-implantitis, 3.53 ± 0.67) of the samples from the three groups showed a significant difference. The beta diversity of the three samples was statistically different among groups. The genera of Conclusions: The community compositions of peri-implant submucosal microorganisms were significantly different in healthy implants, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis. The submucosal microbial communities in peri-implantitis were characterized by high species richness and diversity compared with the healthy implants; the relative abundance of red complex, some members of the yellow complex, and some novel periodontal pathogens was higher in the peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis groups than in the healthy implant group. The core flora of the co-occurrence network of healthy implants, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis varied considerably. The peri-implantitis site presented a relative disequilibrium microbial community, and

Indexed as

BacteriaComputational BiologyDental ImplantsMicrobiotaPeri-ImplantitisRNA, Ribosomal, 16SHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansStomatitisDental ImplantsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S16S rRNAdata analysisdental implantsoral microbiomeperi-implantitis

Identifiers

PMID39268486
PMCPMC11390503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.