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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: C Yue, B Zhao, Y Ren, R Kuijer, HC van der Mei, HJ Busscher, ETJ Rochford
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