Full-mouth disinfection effects on gingival fluid calprotectin, osteocalcin, and N-telopeptide of Type I collagen in severe periodontitis

Utility of gingival crevicular fluid components for periodontal diagnosis

Periodontal diseases are highly prevalent chronic diseases, and severe periodontitis creates functional and esthetic problems and decreases self-esteem for a large percentage of the older population worldwide. In many cases of periodontitis, there is no distinct tell-tale pain that motivates a patient to seek treatment, rather the signs become clinically detectable late, and typically when the disease has progressed to a problematic level for the life of the dentition. Early periodontal screening and diagnostics tools will provide early recognition of periodontal diseases and facilitate timely management of the disease to reduce tooth loss. To this goal, gingival crevicular fluid is easily sampled, can be repeatedly and non-invasively collected, and can be tested for potential biomarkers. Moreover, the site specificity of periodontal diseases enhances the usefulness of gingival crevicular fluid sampled from specific sites as a biofluid for diagnosis and longitudinal monitoring of periodontal diseases. The present review aimed to provide up-to-date information on potential diagnostic biomarkers with utility that can be assayed from gingival crevicular fluid samples, focusing on what is new and useful and providing only general historic background textually and in a tabulated format.

Nonsurgical Treatment of Periodontitis in Menopausal Patients: A Randomized Control Trial

Background

Menopause is typically accompanied by significant systemic and oral manifestations, including hormonal changes and increased susceptibility to periodontal disease, which may involve inflammatory biomarkers like aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and osteocalcin in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). The study is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of regular inoculation of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) as an adjunctive treatment for menopausal women's periodontitis.

Methods

Twenty elderly women with chronic periodontitis were split evenly into two groups by random assignment. Patients in group II (the research group) were given soft gelatin capsules containing PUFAs to be consumed directly once daily for 12 months, as opposed to group I (the control group), who received soft gelatin capsules containing some olive oil (placebo). Scaling and root planning (SRP) were used to address periodontal disease in all cases.

Results

At baseline, six and twelve months after treatment, clinical indicators and AST and osteocalcin amounts in the GCF were noted. By the conclusion of the research period, all observed clinical measurements had changed significantly and improved. In addition, there had been a significant decrease in AST levels and a nonsignificant decrease in osteocalcin levels in group II compared to group I.

Conclusions

Menopausal women with periodontitis who take omega-3 fatty acid supplements in addition to SRP have better oral health. Significant improvements in clinical indicators and a notable decrease in AST levels within the GCF were observed. However, further research with larger cohorts and extended duration is needed to validate these findings and explain potential mechanisms. This trial is registered with NCT06254118.

Is the microbiome the cause of irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease? Lessons to consider from odontology

BACKGROUND

A substantial amount of research is pointing to the disrupted microbiome and dysfunctional host-microbiome interaction as potential causes of Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The true cause of the diseases is still not fully elucidated, and the various treatments used are not truly effective in the long run, especially for IBD, since a true cure is not known to exist. Treatment failure and surgery are common for IBD, many times leading to a perceived lower quality of life, not to mention the enormous cost for society for treatment up until that point and after. Although it is clear that the microbiome has a major role in the disease, it seems the majority of the research and treatments are still focused on treating and understanding the inflammation and not the primary cause of the inflammation in the first place. This was also the case for many decades in the search for the cause of periodontitis (PD) and gingivitis (GV), a destructive and non-destructive inflammatory disorder, respectively, the first resulting in loss of tissue supporting the teeth. There was much uncertainty and confusion until it was fully established that the microbiome was the cause. PD treatments primarily nowadays reflect the cause, i.e. the removal of microbes. There is no doubt, however, that the inflammatory pathways are important in both diseases and the purpose of this text is not to dispute this in respect to gastrointestinal disorders too. However, a different view on inflammation and associated disorders is explored to explain the nature of extraintestinal manifestations.

PURPOSE

The aim of this report is not to systematically fully review the literature to try to strengthen causality, as there are many reviews that explore the microbial aspects of IBS and IBD. Instead, the objective is to above all reflect on what has been learned in the field of odontology/stomatology and discuss relevant gastrointestinal research in order to propose tentative hypotheses and questions regarding IBS and IBD aetiology. Perhaps it could help soften the confusion regarding the microbial aetiology and dysbiosis concept, while guiding future research and treatments, primarily regarding microbial transplants, antibiotics, and diet.

Full-mouth treatment modalities (within 24 hours) for periodontitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Periodontitis is a highly prevalent, chronic inflammation that causes damage to the soft tissues and bones supporting the teeth. Conventional treatment is quadrant scaling and root planing (the second step of periodontal therapy), which comprises scaling and root planing of teeth in one quadrant of the mouth at a time, with the four different sessions separated by at least one week. Alternative protocols for anti-infective periodontal therapy have been introduced to help enhance treatment outcomes: full-mouth scaling (subgingival instrumentation of all quadrants within 24 hours), or full-mouth disinfection (subgingival instrumentation of all quadrants in 24 hours plus adjunctive antiseptic). We use the older term 'scaling and root planing' (SRP) interchangeably with the newer term 'subgingival instrumentation' in this iteration of the review, which updates one originally published in 2008 and first updated in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effects of full-mouth scaling or full-mouth disinfection (within 24 hours) for the treatment of periodontitis compared to conventional quadrant subgingival instrumentation (over a series of visits at least one week apart) and to evaluate whether there was a difference in clinical effects between full-mouth disinfection and full-mouth scaling.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched five databases up to 17 June 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) lasting at least three months that evaluated full-mouth scaling and root planing within 24 hours, with or without adjunctive use of an antiseptic, compared to conventional quadrant SRP (control). Participants had a clinical diagnosis of (chronic) periodontitis according to the International Classification of Periodontal Diseases from 1999. A new periodontitis classification was launched in 2018; however, we used the 1999 classification for inclusion or exclusion of studies, as most studies used it. We excluded studies of people with systemic disorders, taking antibiotics or with the older diagnosis of 'aggressive periodontitis'.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several review authors independently conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment (based on randomisation method, allocation concealment, examiner blinding and completeness of follow-up). Our primary outcomes were tooth loss and change in probing pocket depth (PPD); secondary outcomes were change in probing attachment (i.e. clinical attachment level (CAL)), bleeding on probing (BOP), adverse events and pocket closure (the number/proportion of sites with PPD of 4 mm or less after treatment). We followed Cochrane's methodological guidelines for data extraction and analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs, with 944 participants, in this updated review. No studies assessed the primary outcome tooth loss. Thirteen trials compared full-mouth scaling and root planing within 24 hours without the use of antiseptic (FMS) versus control, 13 trials compared full-mouth scaling and root planing within 24 hours with adjunctive use of an antiseptic (FMD) versus control, and six trials compared FMS with FMD. Of the 13 trials comparing FMS versus control, we assessed three at high risk of bias, six at low risk of bias and four at unclear risk of bias. We assessed our certainty about the evidence as low or very low for the outcomes in this comparison. There was no evidence for a benefit for FMS over control for change in PPD, gain in CAL or reduction in BOP at six to eight months (PPD: mean difference (MD) 0.03 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.14 to 0.20; 5 trials, 148 participants; CAL: MD 0.10 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.26; 5 trials, 148 participants; BOP: MD 2.64%, 95% CI -8.81 to 14.09; 3 trials, 80 participants). There was evidence of heterogeneity for BOP (I² = 50%), but none for PPD and CAL. Of the 13 trials comparing FMD versus control, we judged four at high risk of bias, one at low risk of bias and eight at unclear risk of bias. At six to eight months, there was no evidence for a benefit for FMD over control for change in PPD or CAL (PPD: MD 0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.27; 6 trials, 224 participants; low-certainty evidence; CAL: 0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.24; 6 trials, 224 participants; low-certainty evidence). The analyses found no evidence of a benefit for FMD over control for BOP (very low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of heterogeneity for PPD or CAL, but considerable evidence of heterogeneity for BOP, attributed to one study. There were no consistent differences in these outcomes between intervention and control (low- to very low-certainty evidence). Of the six trials comparing FMS and FMD, we judged two trials at high risk of bias, one at low risk of bias and three as unclear. At six to eight months, there was no evidence of a benefit of FMD over FMS for change in PPD or gain in CAL (PPD: MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.07; P = 0.22; 4 trials, 112 participants; low-certainty evidence; CAL: MD -0.05 mm, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.13; P = 0.58; 4 trials, 112 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between FMS and FMD for BOP at any time point (P = 0.98; 2 trials, 22 participants; low- to very low-certainty evidence). There was evidence of heterogeneity for BOP (I² = 52%), but not for PPD or CAL. Thirteen studies predefined adverse events as an outcome; three reported an event after FMD or FMS. The most important harm identified was an increase in body temperature. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for most comparisons and outcomes as low because of design limitations leading to risk of bias, and the small number of trials and participants, leading to imprecision in the effect estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of nine new RCTs in this updated review has not changed the conclusions of the previous version of the review. There is still no clear evidence that FMS or FMD approaches provide additional clinical benefit compared to conventional mechanical treatment for adult periodontitis. In practice, the decision to select one approach to non-surgical periodontal therapy over another should include patient preference and the convenience of the treatment schedule.

Impact of Three Nonsurgical, Full-Mouth Periodontal Treatments on Total Bacterial Load and Selected Pathobionts

For the treatment of periodontitis stage III/IV, a quadrant/week-wise debridement (Q-SRP) was compared with three full-mouth approaches: full-mouth scaling (FMS, accelerated Q-SRP within 24 h), full-mouth scaling with chlorhexidine-based disinfection (FMD), and FMD with adjuvant erythritol air polishing (FMDAP). The objective of this prospective, randomized study (a substudy of ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03509233) was to compare the clinical and microbiological effects of the treatments. In total, 105 patients were randomized to one of the four aforementioned treatment groups, with n = 25, 28, 27, and 25 patients allocated to each group, respectively. At baseline and 3 and 6 months after treatment, the clinical parameters, including the pocket probing depths, clinical attachment level, and bleeding on probing, were recorded, and the prevalence of the total bacteria and four periodontal pathobionts (Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Tannerella forsythia) was determined using real-time quantitative PCR. Concerning the clinical outcomes, all the treatment modalities were effective, but the full-mouth approaches, especially FMDAP, were slightly superior to Q-SRP. Using the FMD approach, the reduction in the bacterial load and the number of pathobionts was significantly greater than for FMS, followed by Q-SRP. FMDAP was the least effective protocol for microbial reduction. However, after a temporary increase 3 months after therapy using FMDAP, a significant decrease in the key pathogen, P. gingivalis, was observed. These findings were not consistent with the clinical results from the FMDAP group. In conclusion, the dynamics of bacterial colonization do not necessarily correlate with clinical outcomes after full-mouth treatments for periodontitis stage III/IV.

A Roadmap towards Precision Periodontics

Periodontitis is among the most common health conditions and represents a major public health issue related to increasing prevalence and seriously negative socioeconomic impacts. Periodontitis-associated low-grade systemic inflammation and its pathological interplay with systemic conditions additionally raises awareness on the necessity for highly performant strategies for the prevention and management of periodontitis. Periodontal diagnosis is the backbone of a successful periodontal strategy, since prevention and treatment plans depend on the accuracy and precision of the respective diagnostics. Periodontal diagnostics is still founded on clinical and radiological parameters that provide limited therapeutic guidance due to the multifactorial complexity of periodontal pathology, which is why biomarkers have been introduced for the first time in the new classification of periodontal and peri-implant conditions as a first step towards precision periodontics. Since the driving forces of precision medicine are represented by biomarkers and machine learning algorithms, with the lack of periodontal markers validated for diagnostic use, the implementation of a precision medicine approach in periodontology remains in the very initial stage. This narrative review elaborates the unmet diagnostic needs in periodontal diagnostics, the concept of precision periodontics, periodontal biomarkers, and a roadmap toward the implementation of a precision medicine approach in periodontal practice.