Abstract
Abstract: Cell phenotype is influenced by the linear sequence of bases and by epigenetic changes. Despite the huge number of implants placed every year, epigenetic mechanisms controlling peri-implant processes remain unexplored. The purpose of this systematic qualitative review was to investigate the available articles dealing with the relationships between DNA methylations, histone modifications, or micro-RNA (miRNA) production and implant therapy. A large variety of different surfaces were evaluated based on their osteogenic stimulation of osteoblasts. Dental implant treatments like potassium hydroxide (KOH) alkali-etching, electrolytic etching, ionization, functionalization with miRNAs or anti-miRNAs, or osteogenic peptides enhanced osteoblast differentiation and gene activation by regulating miRNA production. Zirconia and anatase coating inhibited the activation of osteogenic genes. Epigenetic changes on peri-implant cells induced by smoking still remain unclear. Due to the heterogeneity of methodologies, a meta-analysis was not possible. Even if it is impossible to define which implant surface was best to genetically stimulate osteogenesis, there is evidence that implant surface features can upregulate or downregulate genes related to osseointegration.
Highlights
The rehabilitation of partial and total edentulism using dental implants has shown highly satisfactory clinical outcomes [1]
The aim of this review was to evaluate the available evidence investigating the potential effects of DNA methylations, histone modifications, or micro-RNA
Systematic bibliographical electronic research was carried out selecting all potentially relevant publications dealing with the influences of implant surface features on gene activation and the influence of epigenetic changes on implant therapy outcomes
Summary
The rehabilitation of partial and total edentulism using dental implants has shown highly satisfactory clinical outcomes [1]. The success of implant therapies has been clinically and histologically documented [2] and is based on osseointegration, a direct structural and functional connection between native living bone and the implant surface [3]. Notwithstanding the wide use of osseointegrated implants, 80% of subjects and 50% of implants suffer from mucositis or other biological problems [4,5]. Biological complications around dental implants have been attributed to several factors, from the establishment of a pathogenic microflora [6]. To the presence of inflammatory cells close to the implant-abutment interface [7,8]. Microbiological findings from sites of failing implants are similar to those in periodontally compromised teeth [9,10] with increased subgingival levels of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Fusobacterium nucleatum.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
