The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper
Biomaterial-implants are frequently used to restore function and form of human anatomy. However, the presence of implanted biomaterials dramatically elevates infection risk. Paradoxically, dental-implants placed in a bacteria-laden milieu experience moderate failure-rates, due to infection (0.0-1.1...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
AO Research Institute Davos
2015-06-01
|
Series: | European Cells & Materials |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.ecmjournal.org/journal/papers/vol029/pdf/v029a23.pdf |
id |
doaj-a2299956ba44413bb723301fa835041e |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a2299956ba44413bb723301fa835041e2020-11-24T20:47:24Zeng AO Research Institute DavosEuropean Cells & Materials1473-22621473-22622015-06-0129303313The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper C YueB ZhaoY RenR KuijerHC van der MeiHJ BusscherETJ Rochford0University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, The NetherlandsBiomaterial-implants are frequently used to restore function and form of human anatomy. However, the presence of implanted biomaterials dramatically elevates infection risk. Paradoxically, dental-implants placed in a bacteria-laden milieu experience moderate failure-rates, due to infection (0.0-1.1 %), similar to the ones of joint-arthroplasties placed in a near-sterile environment (0.1-1.3 %). Transcutaneous bone-fixation pins breach the immune-barrier of the epidermis, exposing underlying sterile-tissue to an unsterile external environment. In contrast to dental-implants, also placed in a highly unsterile environment, these pins give rise to relatively high infection-associated failure-rates of up to 23.0 %. Herein, we attempt to identify causes as to why dental-implants so often succeed, where others fail. The major part of all implants considered are metal-made, with similar surface-finishes. Material choice was therefore discarded as underlying the paradox. Antimicrobial activity of saliva has also been suggested as a cause for the success of dental-implants, but was discarded because saliva is the implant-site-fluid from which viable bacteria adhere. Crevicular fluid was discarded as it is largely analogous to serum. Instead, we attribute the relative success of dental-implants to (1) ability of oral tissues to heal rapidly in the continuous presence of commensal bacteria and opportunistic pathogens, and (2) tolerance of the oral immune-system. Inability of local tissue to adhere, spread and grow in presence of bacteria and an intolerant immune-system are identified as the likely main causes explaining the susceptibility of other implants to infection-associated failure. In conclusion, it is the authors’ belief that new anti-infection strategies for a wide range of biomaterial-implants may be derived from the relative success of dental-implants.http://www.ecmjournal.org/journal/papers/vol029/pdf/v029a23.pdfImplant infectionimmune responseshostpathogensinfection riskbiofilms |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
C Yue B Zhao Y Ren R Kuijer HC van der Mei HJ Busscher ETJ Rochford |
spellingShingle |
C Yue B Zhao Y Ren R Kuijer HC van der Mei HJ Busscher ETJ Rochford The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper European Cells & Materials Implant infection immune responses host pathogens infection risk biofilms |
author_facet |
C Yue B Zhao Y Ren R Kuijer HC van der Mei HJ Busscher ETJ Rochford |
author_sort |
C Yue |
title |
The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper |
title_short |
The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper |
title_full |
The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper |
title_fullStr |
The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper |
title_full_unstemmed |
The implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? Opinion and discussion paper |
title_sort |
implant infection paradox: why do some succeed when others fail? opinion and discussion paper |
publisher |
AO Research Institute Davos |
series |
European Cells & Materials |
issn |
1473-2262 1473-2262 |
publishDate |
2015-06-01 |
description |
Biomaterial-implants are frequently used to restore function and form of human anatomy. However, the presence of implanted biomaterials dramatically elevates infection risk. Paradoxically, dental-implants placed in a bacteria-laden milieu experience moderate failure-rates, due to infection (0.0-1.1 %), similar to the ones of joint-arthroplasties placed in a near-sterile environment (0.1-1.3 %). Transcutaneous bone-fixation pins breach the immune-barrier of the epidermis, exposing underlying sterile-tissue to an unsterile external environment. In contrast to dental-implants, also placed in a highly unsterile environment, these pins give rise to relatively high infection-associated failure-rates of up to 23.0 %. Herein, we attempt to identify causes as to why dental-implants so often succeed, where others fail. The major part of all implants considered are metal-made, with similar surface-finishes. Material choice was therefore discarded as underlying the paradox. Antimicrobial activity of saliva has also been suggested as a cause for the success of dental-implants, but was discarded because saliva is the implant-site-fluid from which viable bacteria adhere. Crevicular fluid was discarded as it is largely analogous to serum. Instead, we attribute the relative success of dental-implants to (1) ability of oral tissues to heal rapidly in the continuous presence of commensal bacteria and opportunistic pathogens, and (2) tolerance of the oral immune-system. Inability of local tissue to adhere, spread and grow in presence of bacteria and an intolerant immune-system are identified as the likely main causes explaining the susceptibility of other implants to infection-associated failure. In conclusion, it is the authors’ belief that new anti-infection strategies for a wide range of biomaterial-implants may be derived from the relative success of dental-implants. |
topic |
Implant infection immune responses host pathogens infection risk biofilms |
url |
http://www.ecmjournal.org/journal/papers/vol029/pdf/v029a23.pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT cyue theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT bzhao theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT yren theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT rkuijer theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT hcvandermei theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT hjbusscher theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT etjrochford theimplantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT cyue implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT bzhao implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT yren implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT rkuijer implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT hcvandermei implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT hjbusscher implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper AT etjrochford implantinfectionparadoxwhydosomesucceedwhenothersfailopinionanddiscussionpaper |
_version_ |
1716810189695352832 |