DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of decontamination methods on bacteria-contaminated titanium surfaces and their influence on gingiva-derived mesenchymal stem cells

  • Sung-Il Lee (Chaeum Dental Clinic) ;
  • Jun-Beom Park (Department of Medicine, Graduate School, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Youngkyung Ko (Department of Medicine, Graduate School, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2026.03.07
  • Accepted : 2026.06.09
  • Published : 2026.06.30

Abstract

Peri-implantitis leads to bacterial contamination of titanium implant surfaces, potentially impairing the integrity of peri-implant tissues. This study investigated the effects of various decontamination strategies on contaminated titanium surfaces and their impact on gingiva-derived mesenchymal stem cells (GMSCs). Both rough and machined titanium surfaces were contaminated with bacteria and subsequently subjected to various mechanical and chemical decontamination methods. GMSC viability and osteogenic responses were analyzed to characterize cellular behavior on the treated surfaces. Cellular responses varied according to surface morphology. On rough surfaces, cell viability declined over time regardless of bacterial contamination or subsequent decontamination treatments. Conversely, machined surfaces supported increased cell viability in both decontaminated and uncontaminated groups, whereas viability remained unchanged on untreated contaminated surfaces. These findings suggest that effective bacterial decontamination of machined surfaces may promote GMSC proliferation and establish cellular conditions favorable for maintaining peri-implant tissue stability under controlled in vitro conditions. Correlation analyses demonstrated surface-dependent osteogenic responses. On rough surfaces, GMSC viability was positively correlated with calcium deposition. These findings suggest that titanium surface morphology may modulate mineralization-associated responses in GMSCs.

Keywords

References

  1. Consensus report. Implant therapy I. Ann Periodontol 1996;1:792-5. doi: 10.1902/annals.1996.1.1.792
  2. Mombelli A, Müller N, Cionca N. The epidemiology of periimplantitis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23 Suppl 6:67-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02541.x
  3. Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of periimplant diseases. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(8 Suppl):286-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01274.x
  4. Gualini F, Berglundh T. Immunohistochemical characteristics of inflammatory lesions at implants. J Clin Periodontol 2003;30:14-8. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2003.300103.x
  5. Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(8 Suppl):292-304. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01275.x
  6. Mombelli A, Lang NP. The diagnosis and treatment of periimplantitis. Periodontol 2000 1998;17:63-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00124.x
  7. Fletcher P, Deluiz D, Tinoco EM, Ricci JL, Tarnow DP, Tinoco JM. Human histologic evidence of reosseointegration around an implant affected with peri-implantitis following decontamination with sterile saline and antiseptics: a case history report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2017;37:499-508. doi: 10.11607/prd.3037
  8. Papathanasiou E, Finkelman M, Hanley J, Parashis AO. Prevalence, etiology and treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a survey of periodontists in the United States. J Periodontol 2016;87:493-501. doi: 10.1902/jop.2015.150476
  9. Louropoulou A, Slot DE, Van der Weijden F. The effects of mechanical instruments on contaminated titanium dental implant surfaces: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1149-60. doi: 10.1111/clr.12224
  10. Docheva D, Padula D, Popov C, Weishaupt P, Prägert M, Miosge N, Hickel R, Böcker W, Clausen-Schaumann H, Schieker M. Establishment of immortalized periodontal ligament progenitor cell line and its behavioural analysis on smooth and rough titanium surface. Eur Cell Mater 2010;19:228-41. doi: 10.22203/ecm.v019a22