| The aim of this study was to assess whether IL - 6 in peri - implant crevicu-lar fluid ( PICF) could be an efficient biochemical marker to monitor peri - im-plantitis by determining the relationship between the level of IL - 6 in PICF and peri - implant condition.Material and Methods1. Subject and PopulationThe population for this cross -sectional study consisted of 56 subjects ,25 women and 31 men, selected from a group of patients treated with implants ( BLB Dental Implant System) . All the fixtures had been placed at least one month before the examination. Patients were all in good health, and had not re-ceived antibiotics during the three months prior to the study. Pregnant women were not included. 66 implants and 66 nature teeth in 56 subjects' s mouth were examined.2. Clinical measurementsPrior to crevicular fluid collection, PLJ, GI, PD, BL, PDI were recorded. All clinical data were collected by one examiner.3. Criteria for health implants, peri - implant mucositis and peri - implanti-tis.These sites were catgegorized on the basis of PLI, PD, GI and BL into three different groups as follows: peri - implantitis ( PI) , peri - implant mucositis (MI) and healthy implants (HI). The criteria have been referred to in previous reports (Mombelli & Lang 1998).4. Crevicular fluid sampling and ELISAPeri -implant crevicular fluid (PICF) was collected mesially and distally to each implant after assessing the presence or absence of plaque, and before registration of any other clinical parameters. IL - 6 concentration was determined by using Interleukin - 6 ELISA kit ( BIO - SOURCE, USA).6. Statistical analysisSAS (version 8. 0) software for IBM 586Results1. A total of 66 implants from 56 patients were classified as follows: 23 healthy implants(34. 85% ), 35 peri - implant mucositis(53. 03% ) and 8 peri-implantitis(12. 12%).2. The level of IL -6 in HI was 1.74 1.66 ng/ml ;in MI was 5. 53 1. 57 ng/ml; in PI was 9. 36 5. 56 ng/ml. The difference among HI, MI and PI was statistically significant at P <0. 01 level, A significant difference existed be-tween HI/PI and MI/PI at P <0. 01 level, statistically significant difference was found between HI/MI at P <0.05 level.3. The level of IL - 6 in the PICF was significandy (P < 0. 01) associated with PLI(r=0.406),GI (r =0. 610) ,PD(r =0.631 )and BL(r=0.491).4. When the threshold for a positive IL -6 test was set 6.0ng/ml,a sen-sitivity = 0.750 and a specificity =0. 862 were found in the detection of peri -implants, The positive predictive value was 42. 8 % and negative predictive value was 96. 2%.5. There were no significant difference in fluid volume, IL -6 levels between PICF from implants and GCF from control teeth in total subjects (P >0. 05 ). For the patients whose fixtures had been placed less than three months, the fluid volume and IL -6 levels were significantly higher than the control (P < 0. 05) , while the difference could not be obtained in patients whose fixtures had been placed more than three months.6. The incidence of peri - implantitis is much higher in the patients with pe-riodontitis than the healthy ( P < 0. 01). There were significantly differences ofPICF volume and IL - 6 levels between the patients with periodontitis and the healthy ( P < 0.05 ) . The difference was of statistical significance.Conclusion1. IL - 6 was always demonstrated in PICG from HI, MI, and PI. The level of IL - 6 was significantly higher in PI as compared with HI and MI. The level of IL - 6 in the PICF was significantly associated with PLI, PD, GI and BL.2. The result may suggest that IL - 6 assessment, if validated as reliable di-agnostic test in dental implants, could represent a useful indicator of peri - im-plant tissue stability. Measurement of IL - 6 in PICF may be an important sup-plement to clinical findings in establishing a diagnosis of peri - implantitis.3. There were significant differences in fluid volume and IL - 6 levels be-tween PICF from implants and GCF from control teeth. F...
|
PDF Full Text Request