Effects of periodontal non-surgical therapy plus azithromycin on glycemic control in patients with diabetes: a randomized clinical trial

Dry Eye in Diabetes: The Indian Diabetic and Endocrine Eye Diseases (INDEED) Review

Dry eye disease (DED) is an inadequately addressed condition in the diabetes management process and can significantly impact the quality of life and self-care. Therefore, it was imperative to review DED in the diabetic population. The aim of this article was to obtain insights into the correlation between dry eye and diabetes, with a focus on data published in the Indian population. A comprehensive literature review was performed using MEDLINE and Google Scholar, along with an internet-based search of publicly available information and peer-reviewed publications that may not have been indexed in these databases. The recommendations from several important societies for patients with DED have also been reviewed. Major aspects commonly associated with DED and diabetes have been addressed, and specific suggestions for screening, diagnosis and treatment have been described. Therefore, this review could be an invaluable resource for doctors managing patients with both conditions.

The Efficacy of Topical or Systemic Antibiotics as Adjuvants to Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background: Periodontitis and diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit a bidirectional relationship and are globally significant systemic chronic conditions. The utilization of antibiotics alongside non-surgical periodontal treatment (NSPT) has been a subject of investigation in numerous clinical studies involving human subjects. Thus, the objective of this systematic review is to address the following question: "What is the efficacy of scaling and root planing (SRP) associated with antimicrobials in patients with type 2 DM and periodontitis?". Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted encompassing databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to July 2024. Additionally, alerts were configured to capture studies published from the initial search until manuscript submission. Randomized clinical trials assessing clinical periodontal parameters in DM patients undergoing SRP and receiving either topical or systemic antibiotics were compared against a control group (SRP only). Two investigators independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated their quality. The selection process, study characteristics, risk of bias, impact of antibiotics on clinical parameters, and certainty of evidence were elucidated in both textual and tabular formats. Meta-analysis was performed separately with forest plots generated for treatment modalities, period of evaluation, and type of antibiotics used. Results: Following the analysis of abstracts and full articles, a total of 30 randomized clinical trials were incorporated into this review, comprising 9 studies on the association of topical antibiotics and 21 studies on systemic antibiotic administration. The principal periodontal parameters assessed included probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BoP). Conclusions: Analysis of the results led to the conclusion that adjunctive periodontal treatment with either topical or systemic antibiotics confers subtle clinical benefits. Nevertheless, owing to the heightened emergence of resistant bacteria and potential side effects, the use of antibiotic therapy in periodontal treatment should be judiciously administered.

Effects of amoxicillin and metronidazole as an adjunct to scaling and root planing on glycemic control in patients with periodontitis and type 2 diabetes: A short-term randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of amoxicillin and metronidazole with scaling and root planing (SRP) on periodontal parameters and glycemic control in patients with severe periodontitis and diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND

Adjunctive antibiotics use is advantageous for treating periodontitis in patients with severe periodontitis and diabetes. However, the effects of adjunctive antibiotic use on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels remain unclear.

METHODS

This short-term, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with severe periodontitis and type 2 diabetes. The patients were randomly allocated to SPR only (i.e., control) or SPR + antibiotics (500 mg of amoxicillin and 200 mg of metronidazole, three times daily for 7 days) groups. Periodontal and hematological parameters were assessed at baseline and 3 months after treatment. Inter- and intra-group analyses were performed using Student's t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and the binary logistic regression models. p-values of <.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 49 patients, with 23 and 26 patients in the SRP-only and SRP + antibiotics groups, respectively. The periodontal parameters improved significantly and similarly in both groups after treatment (p < .05). The SRP + antibiotics group had more sites of improvement than the SRP-only group when the initial probing depth was >6 mm. (698 [78.96%] vs. 545 [73.35%], p = .008). The HbA1c levels decreased in the SRP-only and SRP + antibiotics groups after treatment (0.39% and 0.53%, respectively). The multivariable binary logistic regression model demonstrated that antibiotics administration and a high baseline HbA1c level were associated with a greater reduction in the HbA1c level (odds ratio = 4.551, 95% confidence interval: 1.012-20.463; odds ratio = 7.162, 95% confidence interval: 1.359-37.753, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

SRP and SRP plus systemic antibiotics were beneficial for glycemic control. Adjunctive antibiotic use slightly improved the outcome for patients with severe periodontitis and poorly controlled diabetes.

Systemic azithromycin versus amoxicillin/metronidazole as an adjunct in the treatment of periodontitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of systemic azithromycin (AZT) and amoxicillin/metronidazole (AMX/MTZ) as adjuncts provided additional clinical and microbiological benefits over subgingival instrumentation alone. However, the superiority of one antibiotic regimen over another has not been proven. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analyses was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of subgingival instrumentation (SI) in conjunction with the systemic use of AZT or AMX/MTZ for the treatment of periodontitis from current published literature.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, prospective and retrospective human studies that compared the adjunctive use of systemic AZT to AMX/MTZ with SI in the treatment of periodontitis. The eligibility criteria were defined based on the participant (who had periodontitis), intervention (SI with adjunctive use of systemic AZT), comparison (SI with adjunctive use of systemic AMX/MTZ), outcomes (primary outcome: changes in probing pocket). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. Data were analysed using a statistical software program.

RESULTS

Five studies with 151 participants with periodontitis were included in the present review. Of these, 74 participants received adjunctive AZT, while the remaining participants received AMX/MTZ as an adjunct to SI. The adjunctive use of AZT and AMX/MTZ had comparable changes in probing pocket depths at 1-3 months with no statistically significant difference (mean difference (MD) 0.01; 95% CI -0.20 to 0.22; P = 0.94). The adjunctive use of AZT had significantly fewer number of residual sites with probing pocket depths of ≥5 mm at 1-3 months compared to the adjunctive use of AMX/MTZ (MD -3.41; 95% CI -4.73 to -2.10; P < 0.0001). The prevalence rates of adverse events among participants who received AZT and AMX/MTZ were 9.80% and 14.8%, respectively. The meta-analysis showed that the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (risk ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.72; P = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitation of this review, there was no superiority between AZT and AMX/MTZ in terms of mean changes in probing pocket depths, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing at 1-3 months. AZT seem to be associated with less sites with residual probing pocket depths of ≥5 mm at 1-3 months and fewer adverse events compared with AMX/MTZ. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

Treatment of periodontitis for glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Glycaemic control is a key component in diabetes mellitus (diabetes) management. Periodontitis is the inflammation and destruction of the underlying supporting tissues of the teeth. Some studies have suggested a bidirectional relationship between glycaemic control and periodontitis.  Treatment for periodontitis involves subgingival instrumentation, which is the professional removal of plaque, calculus, and debris from below the gumline using hand or ultrasonic instruments. This is known variously as scaling and root planing, mechanical debridement, or non-surgical periodontal treatment. Subgingival instrumentation is sometimes accompanied by local or systemic antimicrobials, and occasionally by surgical intervention to cut away gum tissue when periodontitis is severe. This review is part one of an update of a review published in 2010 and first updated in 2015, and evaluates periodontal treatment versus no intervention or usual care.  OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of periodontal treatment on glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus and periodontitis.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched six bibliographic databases up to 7 September 2021 and additional search methods were used to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus and a diagnosis of periodontitis that compared subgingival instrumentation (sometimes with surgical treatment or adjunctive antimicrobial therapy or both) to no active intervention or 'usual care' (oral hygiene instruction, education or support interventions, and/or supragingival scaling (also known as PMPR, professional mechanical plaque removal)). To be included, the RCTs had to have lasted at least 3 months and have measured HbA1c (glycated haemoglobin).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently examined the titles and abstracts retrieved by the search, selected the included trials, extracted data from included trials, and assessed included trials for risk of bias. Where necessary and possible, we attempted to contact study authors. Our primary outcome was blood glucose levels measured as glycated (glycosylated) haemoglobin assay (HbA1c), which can be reported as a percentage of total haemoglobin or as millimoles per mole (mmol/mol). Our secondary outcomes included adverse effects, periodontal indices (bleeding on probing, clinical attachment level, gingival index, plaque index, and probing pocket depth), quality of life, cost implications, and diabetic complications.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 studies, which randomised 3249 participants to periodontal treatment or control. All studies used a parallel-RCT design and followed up participants for between 3 and 12 months. The studies focused on people with type 2 diabetes, other than one study that included participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Most studies were mixed in terms of whether metabolic control of participants at baseline was good, fair, or poor. Most studies were carried out in secondary care.  We assessed two studies as being at low risk of bias, 14 studies at high risk of bias, and the risk of bias in 19 studies was unclear. We undertook a sensitivity analysis for our primary outcome based on studies at low risk of bias and this supported the main findings. Moderate-certainty evidence from 30 studies (2443 analysed participants) showed an absolute reduction in HbA1c of 0.43% (4.7 mmol/mol) 3 to 4 months after treatment of periodontitis (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.59% to -0.28%; -6.4 mmol/mol to -3.0 mmol/mol). Similarly, after 6 months, we found an absolute reduction in HbA1c of 0.30% (3.3 mmol/mol) (95% CI -0.52% to -0.08%; -5.7 mmol/mol to -0.9 mmol/mol; 12 studies, 1457 participants), and after 12 months, an absolute reduction of 0.50% (5.4 mmol/mol) (95% CI -0.55% to -0.45%; -6.0 mmol/mol to -4.9 mmol/mol; 1 study, 264 participants). Studies that measured adverse effects generally reported that no or only mild harms occurred, and any serious adverse events were similar in intervention and control arms. However, adverse effects of periodontal treatments were not evaluated in most studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our 2022 update of this review has doubled the number of included studies and participants, which has led to a change in our conclusions about the primary outcome of glycaemic control and in our level of certainty in this conclusion. We now have moderate-certainty evidence that periodontal treatment using subgingival instrumentation improves glycaemic control in people with both periodontitis and diabetes by a clinically significant amount when compared to no treatment or usual care. Further trials evaluating periodontal treatment versus no treatment/usual care are unlikely to change the overall conclusion reached in this review.

Current Concepts in the Management of Periodontitis

Periodontitis is a common disorder affecting >40% of adults in the United States. Globally, the severe form of the disease has a prevalence of 11%. In advanced cases, periodontitis leads to tooth loss and reduced quality of life. The aetiology of periodontitis is multifactorial. Subgingival dental biofilm elicits a host inflammatory and immune response, ultimately leading to irreversible destruction of the periodontium (i.e. alveolar bone and periodontal ligament) in a susceptible host. In order to successfully manage periodontitis, dental professionals must understand the pathogenesis, primary aetiology, risk factors, contributing factors and treatment protocols. Careful diagnosis, elimination of the causes and reduction of modifiable risk factors are paramount for successful prevention and treatment of periodontitis. Initial non-surgical periodontal therapy primarily consists of home care review and scaling and root planing. For residual sites with active periodontitis at periodontal re-evaluation, a contemporary regenerative or traditional resective surgical therapy can be utilised. Thereafter, periodontal maintenance therapy at a regular interval and long-term follow-ups are also crucial to the success of the treatment and long-term retention of teeth. The aim of this review is to provide current concepts of diagnosis, prevention and treatment of periodontitis. Both clinical and biological rationales will be discussed.

Self-correction of pathologic tooth migration after nonsurgical periodontal treatment in a metabolic syndrome patient with severe periodontitis and drug-influenced gingival enlargement

Drug-influenced gingival enlargement (DIGE) and reduced bone support caused by periodontitis are two of the etiologic factors for pathologic tooth migration (PTM). Comprehensive management, including surgical, orthodontic, and prosthodontic treatment, is usually required for recovery from severe DIGE and PTM. An 85-year-old Taiwanese male with a history of hypertension and uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (DM) visited our dental department for severe gingival enlargement and spontaneous bleeding. He was diagnosed as having advanced periodontitis and DIGE. Remarkable PTM occurred on the front sextants of his dentition. The patient's DM was gradually controlled, and his calcium channel blocker treatment was substituted with a new regimen for 7 months. One year after nonsurgical periodontal treatment and reinforcing the patient's oral care, both DIGE and PTM were spontaneously resolved without any surgical or orthodontic intervention. We advocate the value of early diagnosis, improving patient's oral hygiene, and meticulous nonsurgical treatment for both DIGE and PTM.

Association between TNF-α G-308A (rs1800629) polymorphism and susceptibility to chronic periodontitis and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Although the association between tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) G-308A (rs1800629) polymorphism and chronic periodontitis (CP), chronic periodontitis with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DP) is assumed, results of this association have been contradictory. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between rs1800629 polymorphism and CP/DP susceptibility.

METHODS

We searched for studies on PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Chinese National Infrastructure, and WanFang databases. Study selection was performed using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria and fulfilled the PECO (participant, exposure, comparison, and outcome) format. The relationship between rs1800629 polymorphism and CP/DP susceptibility was evaluated by the effect summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Allele, dominant, and recessive genetic models were computed to assess the strength of the association.

RESULTS

A total of 25 case-control studies were included in the analysis. In the Asian population, TNF-α rs1800629 polymorphism was found to be significantly associated with CP in the overall analyses and for all genetic contrasts, while no significant risks were found among Caucasian populations for all genetic contrasts. The TNF-α rs1800629 polymorphism was also associated with increased DP risk in Asians under the fixed-effects model, but not in the recessive comparison.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis suggested that TNF-α rs1800629 polymorphism might affect the risk of CP and DP, particularly in individuals of Asian descent.

Mechanical Debridement with Antibiotics in the Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis: Effect on Systemic Biomarkers-A Systematic Review

In this systematic review, we assessed the effectiveness of systemic antibiotics as an adjunctive therapy to mechanical debridement in improving inflammatory systemic biomarkers, as compared to mechanical debridement alone, among adults with chronic periodontitis. We searched relevant electronic databases for eligible randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We conducted meta-analysis, assessed heterogeneity, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADEPro software. We included 19 studies (n = 1350 participants), representing 18 randomized controlled trials and found very little or no impact of antibiotics on inflammatory biomarkers. A meta-analysis of eight studies demonstrated a mean reduction of 0.26 mm in the periodontal pockets at three months (mean difference [MD] −0.26, 95%CI: −0.36 to −0.17, n = 372 participants, moderate certainty of evidence) in favor of the antibiotics. However, results from five studies reporting clinical attachment level (mm) yielded little or no difference at three months (MD −0.16, 95% CI: −0.35 to 0.03, n = 217 participants) between antibiotic and placebo groups. There is little or no evidence that adjunctive systemic antibiotics therapy improves inflammatory systemic biomarkers, compared to mechanical debridement alone, among adults with chronic periodontitis.

A comparative clinical, microbiological and glycemic analysis of photodynamic therapy and Lactobacillus reuteri in the treatment of chronic periodontitis in type-2 diabetes mellitus patients

BACKGROUND

Evidence indicates that patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit impaired wound healing and are at higher risk for periodontal disease. In DM patients, adjunctive periodontal treatment provides small but statistically significant benefits in terms of reductions in clinical periodontal parameters. This study incorporates antimicrobial and immune modulatory treatment approach specifically targeted at these patients.

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the clinical periodontal, microbiological and HbA1c levels with the use of photodynamic therapy (PDT) and probiotic therapy (PT) as adjunct to root surface debridement (RSD) in the treatment of periodontitis in DM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Demographic data was collected using a questionnaire. Treatment-wise, chronic periodontitis with 2DM patients were subdivided into: (i) Group-A: Patients that underwent RSD with adjunct PDT; (ii) Group-B: Patients that underwent RSD with adjunct PT and; (iii) Group-C: RSD alone. In all groups, probing depth (PD), plaque scores (PS), bleeding on probing (BOP) and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain were measured at baseline and 3 months. Microbiological data consisted the assessment of detection percentage of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia and Treponema denticola.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients completed the trial. All clinical and microbiological parameters showed statistically significant reduction from baseline to 3 months in all groups (p < 0.05). On inter-group comparison, the proportion of PD with ≥4 mm and ≥5 mm showed statistically significant reduction for Group-A compared to Group-B and Group-C (p < 0.01). Only Group-A showed statistically significant reduction in percentage of HbA1c levels from baseline to 3 months (p < 0.05). Groups A and B showed significantly higher reductions for all the three bacteria compared to Group-C (p < 0.05). However, this reduction was comparable between Groups-A and B, respectively (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

PDT showed additional benefit in deep periodontal pockets and slightly modest reduction in HbA1c levels in DM patients. Further clinical trials are required with large sample size and longer follow up duration to ascertain the findings of the present clinical study.

Novel 20% doxycycline-loaded PLGA nanospheres as adjunctive therapy in chronic periodontitis in type-2 diabetics: randomized clinical, immune and microbiological trial

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the clinical, microbiological, and immunological results of poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) nanospheres containing 20% doxycycline (DOXY) in the treatment of type-2 diabetic patients (DM-2) with chronic periodontitis (CP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A parallel, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted in DM-2 presenting severe and generalized CP. All patients received one-stage full-mouth ultrasonic debridement (FMUD) and they were randomly divided into two groups: PLAC (n = 20)-local application of placebo PLGA nanospheres, and DOXY (n = 20)-local application of doxycycline-loaded nanospheres; both in six non-contiguous sites. Clinical, metabolic (fasting plasma glucose level-FPG and glycated hemoglobin-HbA1c), cytokine pattern (multiplexed bead immunoassay) and microbiological assessments were performed at baseline, and 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

Both groups showed clinical improvement in all parameters after treatment (p < 0.05). Deep pockets showed improvements in bleeding on probing-BoP (3 and 6 months), PD (at 3 months), and CAL gain (at 1 and 3 months) favoring DOXY (p < 0.05). The percentage of sites presenting PD reduction and CAL gain ≥ 2 mm was higher in DOXY at 3 months (p < 0.05). DOXY group exhibited a significant increase in the levels of anti-inflammatory interleukin (IL)-10 and a reduction in IL-8, IFN-y, IL-6, and IL-17 (p < 0.05), significant reduction in periodontal pathogens (p < 0.05), and a lower mean percentage of HbA1C at 3 months (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

DOXY nanospheres may be considered a potential adjunct to mechanical debridement in the therapy of periodontitis in DM-2, offering additional benefits in deep pockets, improving the cytokine profile, and reducing periodontal pathogen levels.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of locally applied doxycycline nanospheres may represent an adjunctive therapeutic approach in the treatment of periodontal disease in type-2 diabetic patients, achieving additional benefits in the local modulation of cytokines, microbial reduction, and clinical parameters, especially in deep pockets.

Comparing the periodontal tissue response to non-surgical scaling and root planing alone, adjunctive azithromycin, or adjunctive amoxicillin plus metronidazole in generalized chronic moderate-to-severe periodontitis: a preliminary randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The usefulness of administrating adjunctive systemic antibiotics to expedite healing of periodontal tissues is a topic of interest given the lack of clear guidelines.

AIM

To compare clinical outcomes in patients given adjunctive azithromycin (AZ), adjunctive amoxicillin plus metronidazole (AMX + MTZ), or scaling and root planing (SRP) alone in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic periodontitis.

METHODS

Thirty-eight patients were randomly assigned into: SRP alone; 500 mg AMX plus 400 mg MTZ three times per day for 7 days; or 500 mg AZ for 3 days. Antibiotics were administered after the first SRP session and clinical parameters for full-mouth and baseline probing pocket depth (PPD) categories were reviewed 2-months post-treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 38 patients completed the study. All groups experienced significant improvements in full-mouth clinical attachment level (CAL), probing pocket depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing. AZ exhibited greater reductions in PPD than SRP alone for baseline severe sites, whilst AMX+MTZ showed significant improvements in PPD and CAL than SRP alone for baseline moderate and severe sites. Of the two antibiotic therapies, AMX+MTZ showed greater reductions in PPD compared with AZ in baseline moderate sites only.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with moderate-to-severe periodontitis, adjunctive systemic antibiotics might result in greater clinical benefits.

Adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics versus placebo for any indication

BACKGROUND

Macrolide antibiotics (macrolides) are among the most commonly prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are used for a wide range of infections. However, macrolides also expose people to the risk of adverse events. The current understanding of adverse events is mostly derived from observational studies, which are subject to bias because it is hard to distinguish events caused by antibiotics from events caused by the diseases being treated. Because adverse events are treatment-specific, rather than disease-specific, it is possible to increase the number of adverse events available for analysis by combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the same treatment across different diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the incidences of reported adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics compared to placebo for any indication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register (2018, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid, from 1946 to 8 May 2018); Embase (from 2010 to 8 May 2018); CINAHL (from 1981 to 8 May 2018); LILACS (from 1982 to 8 May 2018); and Web of Science (from 1955 to 8 May 2018). We searched clinical trial registries for current and completed trials (9 May 2018) and checked the reference lists of included studies and of previous Cochrane Reviews on macrolides.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that compared a macrolide antibiotic to placebo for any indication. We included trials using any of the four most commonly used macrolide antibiotics: azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, or roxithromycin. Macrolides could be administered by any route. Concomitant medications were permitted provided they were equally available to both treatment and comparison groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included studies and the quality of evidence for each outcome of interest. We analysed specific adverse events, deaths, and subsequent carriage of macrolide-resistant bacteria separately. The study participant was the unit of analysis for each adverse event. Any specific adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of any group were reported. We undertook a meta-analysis when three or more included studies reported a specific adverse event.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 183 studies with a total of 252,886 participants (range 40 to 190,238). The indications for macrolide antibiotics varied greatly, with most studies using macrolides for the treatment or prevention of either acute respiratory tract infections, cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, gastrointestinal conditions, or urogynaecological problems. Most trials were conducted in secondary care settings. Azithromycin and erythromycin were more commonly studied than clarithromycin and roxithromycin.Most studies (89%) reported some adverse events or at least stated that no adverse events were observed.Gastrointestinal adverse events were the most commonly reported type of adverse event. Compared to placebo, macrolides caused more diarrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.16; low-quality evidence); more abdominal pain (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.26; low-quality evidence); and more nausea (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.90; moderate-quality evidence). Vomiting (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.56; moderate-quality evidence) and gastrointestinal disorders not otherwise specified (NOS) (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.00; moderate-quality evidence) were also reported more often in participants taking macrolides compared to placebo.The number of additional people (absolute difference in risk) who experienced adverse events from macrolides was: gastrointestinal disorders NOS 85/1000; diarrhoea 72/1000; abdominal pain 62/1000; nausea 47/1000; and vomiting 23/1000.The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) ranged from 12 (95% CI 8 to 23) for gastrointestinal disorders NOS to 17 (9 to 47) for abdominal pain; 19 (12 to 33) for diarrhoea; 19 (13 to 30) for nausea; and 45 (22 to 295) for vomiting.There was no clear consistent difference in gastrointestinal adverse events between different types of macrolides or route of administration.Taste disturbances were reported more often by participants taking macrolide antibiotics, although there were wide confidence intervals and moderate heterogeneity (OR 4.95, 95% CI 1.64 to 14.93; I² = 46%; low-quality evidence).Compared with participants taking placebo, those taking macrolides experienced hearing loss more often, however only four studies reported this outcome (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence).We did not find any evidence that macrolides caused more cardiac disorders (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; very low-quality evidence); hepatobiliary disorders (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.09; very low-quality evidence); or changes in liver enzymes (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.37; very low-quality evidence) compared to placebo.We did not find any evidence that appetite loss, dizziness, headache, respiratory symptoms, blood infections, skin and soft tissue infections, itching, or rashes were reported more often by participants treated with macrolides compared to placebo.Macrolides caused less cough (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo, probably because these are not adverse events, but rather characteristics of the indications for the antibiotics. Less fever (OR 0.73, 95% 0.54 to 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) was also reported by participants taking macrolides compared to placebo, although these findings were non-significant.There was no increase in mortality in participants taking macrolides compared with placebo (OR 0.96, 95% 0.87 to 1.06; I² = 11%; low-quality evidence).Only 24 studies (13%) provided useful data on macrolide-resistant bacteria. Macrolide-resistant bacteria were more commonly identified among participants immediately after exposure to the antibiotic. However, differences in resistance thereafter were inconsistent.Pharmaceutical companies supplied the trial medication or funding, or both, for 91 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The macrolides as a group clearly increased rates of gastrointestinal adverse events. Most trials made at least some statement about adverse events, such as "none were observed". However, few trials clearly listed adverse events as outcomes, reported on the methods used for eliciting adverse events, or even detailed the numbers of people who experienced adverse events in both the intervention and placebo group. This was especially true for the adverse event of bacterial resistance.

Clinical and microbiological effects of scaling and root planing, metronidazole and amoxicillin in the treatment of diabetic and non-diabetic subjects with periodontitis: A cohort study

AIM

To evaluate if non-diabetic subjects with periodontitis respond better than subjects with type 2 diabetes to the treatment protocol of scaling and root planing (SRP), metronidazole (MTZ) and amoxicillin (AMX).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Diabetic and nondiabetic subjects with severe periodontitis received SRP + MTZ (400 mg/thrice a day [TID]) + AMX (500 mg/TID) for 14 days. Subgingival biofilm samples were analyzed by checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization for 40 bacterial species. Subjects were monitored at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months post-therapy.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine type 2 diabetics and 29 non-diabetic subjects participated of this study. Of the non-diabetics and diabetics, 68.9% and 75.9%, respectively, reached the clinical endpoint for treatment (≤4 sites with probing depth [PD] ≥5 mm) at 1 year post-therapy (p > 0.05). The diabetic group presented lower mean clinical attachment gain from baseline to 1 year post-therapy and higher mean proportions of the red and orange complexes than the non-diabetic group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-diabetic subjects with severe periodontitis did not respond better than type 2 diabetic subjects to the treatment protocol of SRP + MTZ + AMX, both in terms of achieving the clinical endpoint for treatment and of PD improvement. Diabetic subjects exhibited a slightly worse microbiological response and showed a healing process more associated with gingival recession than the non-diabetics.

Efficacy of systemic antibiotics in nonsurgical periodontal therapy for diabetic subjects: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of systemic antibiotics as adjuncts to nonsurgical periodontal treatment (NSPT), as opposed to using NSPT alone, on periodontal clinical parameters of diabetic patients with periodontitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomised controlled trials with a follow-up of 3 months or more, assessing the effects of NSPT in combination with antibiotics, in diabetic patients with periodontitis were included. Trials published up to August 2016 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases. Meta-analyses were conducted to determine changes in clinical attachment level (CAL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and gingival index (GI). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in this review.

RESULTS

Of the 164 papers potentially admissible to this systematic review, 15 articles on 11 randomised clinical trials were considered as eligible. The results of the meta-analyses presented a modest additional benefit of 0.14 mm (95% confidence interval: 0.08-0.20) in reducing PPD but no further benefit in CAL gain.

CONCLUSION

When the data for all antibiotic protocols were considered together for the treatment of periodontitis patients with DM, a significant, albeit small, reduction of PPD and no improvement in CAL gain was observed. When the antibiotic protocols were analysed separately, the combination of amoxicillin plus metronidazole yielded the best results for PPD.

Systemic antimicrobials adjuvant to periodontal therapy in diabetic subjects: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant antibiotics have been suggested to improve periodontal therapy in diabetic subjects.

AIM

The aim of this study was to systematically review randomized clinical trials assessing systemic antimicrobial use adjuvant to scaling and root planing (SRP) versus SRP alone in diabetic subjects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, TRIP, Web of Science and LILACS databases and the grey literature were searched through May 2015. Of 2534 potentially eligible studies, 13 were included in the systematic review. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) in probing depth (PD) reduction and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain (primary outcomes), and plaque index (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP) reductions, were estimated using a random effect model.

RESULTS

The WMD in PD reduction [-0.15 mm, n = 11, p = 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.24, -0.06] favoured antibiotic use. WMDs in CAL gain, PI and BOP reductions (-0.14 mm, n = 9, p = 0.11, 95% CI -0.32, 0.03; 4.01%, n = 7, p = 0.05, 95% CI -0.04, 8.07; and -1.91%, n = 7, p = 0.39, 95% CI -6.32, 2.51 respectively) did not favour adjunctive antibiotic use.

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive therapy may improve the efficacy of SRP in reducing PD in diabetic subjects.

Modulation of periodontitis progression using pH-responsive nanosphere encapsulating metronidazole or N-phenacylthialzolium bromide

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop pH-responsive polylactide-glycolic acid co-polymer and chitosan (PLGA/chitosan) nanosphere as an inflammation-responsive vehicle and evaluate the potential of the nanosphere encapsulating metronidazole, an antibiotic, and N-phenacylthiazolium bromide (PTB), a host modulator, for treating periodontitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PLGA/chitosan nanospheres were fabricated using oil-in-water emulsion method. Experimental periodontitis was induced on the rat maxillae, and the sites were randomly allocated to four treatment categories, including periodontitis alone (PR), periodontitis with nanospheres alone, nanospheres encapsulating metronidazole (MT) and nanospheres encapsulating PTB (PB). The ligature was retained until the animals were killed, and the treatment outcome was evaluated by the progression of periodontal bone loss (PPBL), inflammatory cell infiltration and collagen deposition.

RESULTS

The encapsulated drug was released rapidly from the nanospheres without significant initial burst release at pH 5.5. Compared with group PR, PPBL was significantly reduced in groups MT and PB on day 4 (P<.05). On day 21, PPBL was significantly lower in group PB (P<.05). In groups MT and PB, inflammation was significantly reduced in groups MT and PB relative to groups PR and periodontitis with nanospheres alone (P<.05), and collagen deposition was significantly greater relative to group PR (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

PLGA/chitosan nanospheres encapsulating metronidazole or PTB showed potential for modulating periodontitis progression.

Effects on HbA1c in diabetic patients of adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics in nonsurgical periodontal treatment: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics in nonsurgical periodontal treatment compared to nonsurgical periodontal treatment alone, on mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reductions in patients with diabetes.

DATA

Two independent reviewers screened six electronic databases, registers of clinical trials, meeting abstracts and four major dental journals for controlled clinical trials with at least 3-month follow-up.

SOURCES

After duplicates removal, electronic and hand searches yielded 2136 records; 32 full-text articles were independently read by two reviewers. To evaluate the additional effect of antibiotic usage, pooled weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using fixed and random effects models.

STUDY SELECTION

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which provided data that allowed their inclusion in meta-analyses. The meta-analyses showed no significant effect favouring scaling and root planing (SRP) plus antibiotic for reductions in mean HbA1c (-0.11% [-0.35, 0.13]; 6 studies), and an estimated prediction interval varying from -0.45 to 0.23. There was also no significant effect favouring the adjunctive usage of sub-antimicrobial doxycycline in HbA1c mean reduction (-0.19% [-1.04, 0.67]; 2 studies).

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive use of systemic antibiotic provides no statistically significant benefit in terms of HbA1c improvement in periodontal treatment of patients with diabetes.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics associated with nonsurgical periodontal treatment provides no additional benefit in terms of HbA1c of diabetic patients. Clinicians should weigh the trade-off between risks and benefits provided by the use of systemic antibiotics before prescribing them for periodontal disease treatment.

Azithromycin as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to investigate the current published work relating to the clinical benefits of the use of systemic azithromycin as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy. A published work search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials up to 27 April 2016 was undertaken. The large degree of heterogeneity in the types of studies, treatment protocols, test subjects, sample size and exclusion criteria indicated that the use of narrative synthesis of all relevant studies was a valid method of review. Of the 194 eligible studies, 15 were found to be of relevance. The majority of studies demonstrated an additional clinical benefit when azithromycin is used as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy, particularly in deeper pockets (≥6 mm). In conclusion, the current body of research on the adjunctive use of systemic azithromycin in non-surgical periodontal therapy suggests there is a clinical benefit and that this benefit is greatest in deeper initial pockets (≥6 mm). The findings also suggest that future studies need to be more careful in subject selection to identify susceptible patients or at risk sites, both the immunoregulatory effects and antibiotic resistance of azithromycin needs to be reported, and that study populations need to be more homogeneous.

Correlation between periodontal disease management and metabolic control of type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic literature review

Background

Diabetes and periodontal disease share common features in terms of inflammatory responses. Current scientific evidence suggests that treatment of periodontal disease might contribute to glycemic control. The objective of the study is a review of the last three years.

Material and Methods

A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane, and Scopus databases, for articles published between 01-01-2013 and 30-06-2015, applying the key terms “periodontal disease” AND “diabetes mellitus”. The review analyzed clinical trials of humans published in English and Spanish.

Results

Thirteen clinical trials were reviewed, representing a total of 1,912 patients. Three of them had samples of <40 patients, making a total of 108 patients and the remaining ten samples had >40 patients, representing a total of 1,804. Only one article achieved a Jadad score of five. Seven articles (998 patients, 52.3% total), presented a statistically significant decrease in HbA1c (p< 0.05) as a result of periodontal treatment. In the six remaining articles (representing 914 patients, 47.8% of the total), the decrease in HbA1c was not significant. Patient follow-up varied between 3 to 12 months. In three articles, the follow-up was of 3, 4, and 9 months, in two 6 and 12 months.

Conclusions

The majority of clinical trials showed that radicular curettage and smoothing, whether associated with antibiotics or not, can improve periodontal conditions in patients with diabetes mellitus. However, few studies suggest that this periodontal treatment improves metabolic control. However, there is no clear evidence of a relation between periodontal treatment and improved glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Key words:Diabetes, periodontal disease, HbA1c, metabolic control.

Periodontal treatment and glycaemic control in patients with diabetes and periodontitis: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that non-surgical periodontal treatment improves glycaemic control in patients with diabetes and periodontitis. The aim of this umbrella review is to summarize the effects of periodontal treatment on glycaemic control in patients with periodontitis and diabetes.

METHODS

A systematic review of systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published between 1995 and 2015 was performed. Three independent reviewers assessed for article selection, quality and data extraction.

RESULTS

Thirteen (13) systematic reviews/meta-analysis were included for qualitative synthesis. A reduction (0.23 to 1.03 percentage points) in the levels of HbA1c at 3 months after periodontal intervention was found. This reduction was statistically significant in 10/12 meta-analysis. One review with sufficiently large samples found a non-significant reduction (-0.014 percentage points; 95% CI -0.18 to 0.16; p = 0.87). Only three studies separated the use of adjunctive antibiotics and found a reduction of 0.36 percentage points but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Highly heterogeneous short-term studies with small sample size suggest that periodontal treatment could help improve glycaemic control at 3 months in patients with type 2 diabetes and periodontitis. However, longer term studies having sufficient sample size do not provide evidence that periodontal therapy improves glycaemic control in these patients.

Factors associated with the clinical response to nonsurgical periodontal therapy in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a growing health problem worldwide. People with T2DM are at risk of experiencing periodontitis and likely require treatment. Using data from the national multicenter Diabetes and Periodontal Therapy Trial (DPTT), the authors assessed patient-based characteristics associated with the clinical response to nonsurgical therapy.

METHODS

The DPTT investigators randomly assigned adults with T2DM (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥ 7 percent and < 9 percent) and moderate to advanced periodontitis to receive immediate or delayed therapy (scaling and root planing, oral hygiene instruction, chlorhexidine rinse). The investigators assessed probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), and medical conditions at baseline, three months and six months. Six-month changes in mean PD, CAL and BOP defined the treatment response. Complete data were available for 473 of 514 DPTT participants. The authors used multiple regression models to evaluate participant-level factors associated with the response.

RESULTS

More severe baseline PD, CAL and BOP were associated with greater improvements in these same measurements (P < .0001). Hispanic participants experienced greater improvements in PD and CAL than did non-Hispanic participants (P < .0001). Obese participants (those with a body mass index > 30 kilograms per square meter) experienced greater reductions in PD and BOP than did participants who were not obese (P < .001). Age, sex, HbA1c values, diabetes duration, and smoking were not associated with change in any outcome (P > .1).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2DM, baseline disease severity was associated with the clinical response to nonsurgical periodontal therapy. Body mass index and Hispanic ethnicity-but not glycemic control, diabetes duration or smoking-also may be useful in predicting clinical changes in this population.

Amoxicillin Plus Metronidazole Therapy for Patients with Periodontitis and Type 2 Diabetes

The aim of this study was to assess the changes occurring in subgingival biofilm composition and in the periodontal clinical parameters of subjects with periodontitis and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) treated by means of scaling and root planing (SRP) only or combined with systemic metronidazole (MTZ) and amoxicillin (AMX). Fifty-eight subjects were randomly assigned to receive SRP only ( n = 29) or with MTZ (400 mg/thrice a day [TID]) and AMX (500 mg/TID) ( n = 29) for 14 d. Six subgingival plaque samples/subject were analyzed by checkerboard DNA–DNA hybridization for 40 bacterial species at baseline and 3 mo, 1 y, and 2 y posttherapy. At 2 y posttherapy, the antibiotic-treated group harbored lower mean proportions (5.5%) of red complex pathogens than the control group (12.1%) ( P < 0.05). The proportions of the Actinomyces species remained stable in the antibiotic group but showed a statistically significant reduction in the control group from 1 to 2 y in subjects achieving a low risk clinical profile for future disease progression (i.e., ≤4 sites with probing depth [PD] ≥5 mm). The test group also had a lower mean number of sites with PD ≥5 mm (3.5 ± 3.4) and a higher percentage of subjects reaching the low risk clinical profile (76%) than the control group (14.7 ± 13.1 and 22%, respectively) ( P < 0.05) at 2 y posttreatment. MTZ + AMX intake was the only significant predictor of subjects achieving the low risk at 2 y (odds ratio, 20.9; P = 0.0000). In conclusion, the results of this study showed that the adjunctive use of MTZ + AMX improves the microbiological and clinical outcomes of SRP in the treatment of subjects with generalized chronic periodontitis and type 2 DM up to 2 y ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02135952).

Management of diabolical diabetes mellitus and periodontitis nexus: Are we doing enough?

Periodontitis is the commonest oral disease affecting population worldwide. This disease is notorious for the devastation of tooth supporting structures, ensuing in the loss of dentition. The etiology for this disease is bacterial biofilm, which accumulates on the teeth as dental plaque. In addition to the biofilm microorganisms, other factors such as environmental, systemic and genetic are also responsible in progression of periodontitis. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is metabolic disorder which has an impact on the global health. DM plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of periodontitis. Periodontitis is declared as the “sixth” major complication of DM. Evidence based literature has depicted an enhanced incidence and severity of periodontitis in subjects with DM. A “two way” relationship has been purported between periodontitis and DM. Mutual management of both conditions is necessary. Periodontal therapy (PT) may assist to diminish the progression of DM and improve glycemic control. Various advanced technological facilities may be utilized for the purpose of patient education and disease management. The present paper clarifies the etio-pathogenesis of periodontitis, establishing it as a complication of DM and elaborating the various mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis. The role of PT in amelioration of DM and application of digital communication will be discussed. Overall, it is judicious to create an increased patient cognizance of the periodontitis-DM relationship. Conjunctive efforts must be undertaken by the medical and oral health care professionals for the management of periodontitis affected DM patients.

Systemic Antibiotics in Periodontal Treatment of Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review

Aim

To evaluate the effects of systemic antibiotics in combination with scaling and root planing (SRP) on periodontal parameters, tooth loss and oral health-related quality of life in diabetes patients.

Materials and Methods

Two independent reviewers screened for controlled clinical trials with at least 6-month follow-up in six electronic databases, registers of clinical trials, meeting abstracts and four major dental journals. After duplicates removal, electronic and hand searches yielded 1,878 records; 18 full-text articles were independently read by two reviewers. To evaluate the additional effect of antibiotic usage, pooled weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a fixed effects model.

Results

Five studies met the inclusion criteria, four of which were included in meta-analyses. The meta-analyses showed a significant effect favouring SRP plus antibiotic for reductions in mean probing depth (PD) (-0.22 mm [-0.34, -0.11]) and mean percentage of bleeding on probing (BoP) (4% [-7, -1]). There was no significant effect for clinical attachment level gain and plaque index reduction. No study reported on tooth loss and oral health-related quality of life.

Conclusion

Adjunctive systemic antibiotic use in diabetic patients provides a small additional benefit in terms of reductions in mean PD and mean percentage of BoP.

Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42013006389.

Treatment of periodontal disease for glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Glycaemic control is a key issue in the care of people with diabetes mellitus (DM). Periodontal disease is the inflammation and destruction of the underlying supporting tissues of the teeth. Some studies have suggested a bidirectional relationship between glycaemic control and periodontal disease. This review updates the previous version published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to investigate the effect of periodontal therapy on glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 31 December 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 31 December 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 31 December 2014), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 31 December 2014), and CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 31 December 2014). ZETOC (1993 to 31 December 2014) and Web of Knowledge (1990 to 31 December 2014) were searched for conference proceedings. Additionally, two periodontology journals were handsearched for completeness, Annals of Periodontology (1996 to 2003) and Periodontology 2000 (1993 to 2003). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with type 1 or type 2 DM (T1DM/T2DM) with a diagnosis of periodontitis. Interventions included periodontal treatments such as mechanical debridement, surgical treatment and antimicrobial therapy. Two broad comparisons were proposed:1. periodontal therapy versus no active intervention/usual care;2. periodontal therapy versus alternative periodontal therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this review update, at least two review authors independently examined the titles and abstracts retrieved by the search, selected the included trials, extracted data from included trials and assessed included trials for risk of bias.Our primary outcome was blood glucose levels measured as glycated (glycosylated) haemoglobin assay (HbA1c).Our secondary outcomes included adverse effects, periodontal indices (bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival index (GI), plaque index (PI) and probing pocket depth (PPD)), cost implications and diabetic complications.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 studies (including seven from the previous version of the review), which included 2565 participants in total. All studies used a parallel RCT design, and 33 studies (94%) only targeted T2DM patients. There was variation between studies with regards to included age groups (ages 18 to 80), duration of follow-up (3 to 12 months), use of antidiabetic therapy, and included participants' baseline HbA1c levels (from 5.5% to 13.1%).We assessed 29 studies (83%) as being at high risk of bias, two studies (6%) as being at low risk of bias, and four studies (11%) as unclear. Thirty-four of the studies provided data suitable for analysis under one or both of the two comparisons.Comparison 1: low quality evidence from 14 studies (1499 participants) comparing periodontal therapy with no active intervention/usual care demonstrated that mean HbA1c was 0.29% lower (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48% to 0.10% lower) 3 to 4 months post-treatment, and 0.02% lower after 6 months (five studies, 826 participants; 95% CI 0.20% lower to 0.16% higher).Comparison 2: 21 studies (920 participants) compared different periodontal therapies with each other. There was only very low quality evidence for the multiple head-to-head comparisons, the majority of which were unsuitable to be pooled, and provided no clear evidence of a benefit for one periodontal intervention over another. We were able to pool the specific comparison between scaling and root planing (SRP) plus antimicrobial versus SRP and there was no consistent evidence that the addition of antimicrobials to SRP was of any benefit to delivering SRP alone (mean HbA1c 0.00% lower: 12 studies, 450 participants; 95% CI 0.22% lower to 0.22% higher) at 3-4 months post-treatment, or after 6 months (mean HbA1c 0.04% lower: five studies, 206 patients; 95% CI 0.41% lower to 0.32% higher).Less than half of the studies measured adverse effects. The evidence was insufficient to conclude whether any of the treatments were associated with harm. No other patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were measured by the included studies, and neither were cost implications or diabetic complications.Studies showed varying degrees of success with regards to achieving periodontal health, with some showing high levels of residual inflammation following treatment. Statistically significant improvements were shown for all periodontal indices (BOP, CAL, GI, PI and PPD) at 3-4 and 6 months in comparison 1; however, this was less clear for individual comparisons within the broad category of comparison 2.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low quality evidence that the treatment of periodontal disease by SRP does improve glycaemic control in people with diabetes, with a mean percentage reduction in HbA1c of 0.29% at 3-4 months; however, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that this is maintained after 4 months.There was no evidence to support that one periodontal therapy was more effective than another in improving glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus.In clinical practice, ongoing professional periodontal treatment will be required to maintain clinical improvements beyond 6 months. Further research is required to determine whether adjunctive drug therapies should be used with periodontal treatment. Future RCTs should evaluate this, provide longer follow-up periods, and consider the inclusion of a third 'no treatment' control arm.Larger, well conducted and clearly reported studies are needed in order to understand the potential of periodontal treatment to improve glycaemic control among people with diabetes mellitus. In addition, it will be important in future studies that the intervention is effective in reducing periodontal inflammation and maintaining it at lowered levels throughout the period of observation.

Clinical effect of azithromycin as an adjunct to non-surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials

The results of recent published studies focusing on the effect of azithromycin as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) in the treatment of chronic periodontitis are inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials to examine the effect of azithromycin combined with SRP on periodontal clinical parameters as compared to SRP alone. An electronic search was carried out on Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their earliest records through December 28, 2014 to identify studies that met pre-stated inclusion criteria. Reference lists of retrieved articles were also reviewed. Data were extracted independently by two authors. Either a fixed- or random-effects model was used to calculate the overall effect sizes of azithromycin on probing depth, attachment level (AL) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Q test and I(2) statistic. Publication bias was evaluated by Begg's test and Egger's test. A total of 14 trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with SRP alone, locally delivered azithromycin plus SRP statistically significantly reduced probing depth by 0.99 mm (95% CI 0.42-1.57) and increased AL by 1.12 mm (95% CI 0.31-1.92). In addition, systemically administered azithromycin plus SRP statistically significantly reduced probing depth by 0.21 mm (95% CI 0.12-0.29), BOP by 4.50% (95% CI 1.45-7.56) and increased AL by 0.23 mm (95% CI 0.07-0.39). Sensitivity analysis yielded similar results. No evidence of publication bias was observed. The additional benefit of systemic azithromycin was shown at the initially deep probing depth sites, but not at shallow or moderate sites. The overall effect sizes of systemic azithromycin showed a tendency to decrease with time, and meta-regression analysis suggested a negative relation between the length of follow-up and net change in probing depth (r = -0.05, p = 0.02). This meta-analysis provides further evidence that azithromycin used as an adjunct to SRP significantly improves the efficacy of non-surgical periodontal therapy on reducing probing depth, BOP and improving AL, particularly at the initially deep probing depth sites.

Relationship between diabetes and periodontal infection

Periodontal disease is a high prevalent disease. In the United States 47.2% of adults ≥ 30 years old have been diagnosed with some type of periodontitis. Longitudinal studies have demonstrated a two-way relationship between diabetes and periodontitis, with more severe periodontal tissue destruction in diabetic patients and poorer glycemic control in diabetic subjects with periodontal disease. Periodontal treatment can be successful in diabetic patients. Short term effects of periodontal treatment are similar in diabetic patients and healthy population but, more recurrence of periodontal disease can be expected in no well controlled diabetic individuals. However, effects of periodontitis and its treatment on diabetes metabolic control are not clearly defined and results of the studies remain controversial.

[Clinical efficiency of short and long-term adjuvant therapy of chronic periodontal disease with azithromycin]

The purpose of the study was to compare the clinical response to two regimes of azithromycin use in the complex of non-surgical periodontal therapy. After initial periodontal therapy of chronic generalized periodontitis (CGP), 60 patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups. In group 2 and 3 azithromycin was administered: 500 mg 1 time per day, 3 days, and by 500 mg 1 time per day, 7 days, followed by 500 mg 1 time per week for 12 weeks. Clinical indexes were record before treatment and after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. After 3 months 13 patients in group 1st had the exacerbation of CGP, and only 1 and 2 patients (p<0.05) in the 2nd and 3rd groups, respectively. After 12 months, significantly fewer patients on the 3rd group (as compared with the 1st (p=0.0015) and the 2nd (p=0.0040) had clinical exacerbation. Unscheduled visits were significantly less in the 3rd group as compared with the 1st (χ(2)=8.03; p=0.0046). The long-term adjunctive azithromycin results in a significantly clinical benefit of 80% patients for 1 year with satisfactory tolerance.

The effect of periodontal treatment on hemoglobin a1c levels of diabetic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is growing evidence that periodontal treatment may affect glycemic control in diabetic patients. And several systematic reviews have been conducted to assess the effect of periodontal treatment on diabetes outcomes. Researches of this aspect are widely concerned, and several new controlled trials have been published. The aim of this study was to update the account for recent findings.

Methods

A literature search (until the end of January 2014) was carried out using various databases with language restriction to English. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was selected if it investigated periodontal therapy for diabetic subjects compared with a control group received no periodontal treatment for at least 3 months of the follow-up period. The primary outcome was hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and secondary outcomes were periodontal parameters included probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL).

Results

Ten trials of 1135 patients were included in the analysis. After the follow-up of 3 months, treatment substantially lowered HbA1c compared with no treatment after periodontal therapy (–0.36%, 95%CI, −0.52% to −0.19%, P<0.0001). Clinically substantial and statistically significant reduction of PPD and CAL were found between subjects with and without treatment after periodontal therapy (PPD −0.42 mm, 95%CI: −0.60 to −0.23, P<0.00001; CAL −0.34 mm, 95%CI: −0.52 to −0.16, P = 0.0002). And there is no significant change of the level of HbA1c at the 6-month comparing with no treatment (–0.30%, 95%CI, −0.69% to 0.09%, P = 0.13).

Conclusions

Periodontal treatment leads to the modest reduction in HbA1c along with the improvement of periodontal status in diabetic patients for 3 months, and this result is consistent with previous systematic reviews. And the effect of periodontal treatment on HbA1c cannot be observed at 6-month after treatment.

Metronidazole and amoxicillin as adjuncts to scaling and root planing for the treatment of type 2 diabetic subjects with periodontitis: 1-year outcomes of a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial

AIM

To evaluate the clinical and microbiological effects of the use of metronidazole (MTZ) + amoxicillin (AMX) as adjuncts to scaling and root planing (SRP) for the treatment of chronic periodontitis (ChP) in type 2 diabetic subjects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-eight type 2 diabetic subjects (n = 29/group) with generalized ChP were randomly assigned to receive SRP alone or with MTZ [400 mg/thrice a day (TID)]+AMX (500 mg/TID) for 14 days. Subgingival biofilm samples were analyzed by qPCR for the presence of seven periodontal pathogens. Subjects were monitored at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months post-therapies.

RESULTS

The group receiving SRP+MTZ+AMX presented greater mean probing depth (PD) reduction and clinical attachment gain, a lower number of sites with PD ≥5 mm (primary outcome variable) and a reduced number of subjects with ≥9 of these residual pockets than the control group at 1-year post-therapy (p < 0.05). The antibiotic-treated group also presented reduced levels and greater decreases of the three red complex species, Eubacterium nodatum and Prevotella intermedia, compared to the control group at 1 year (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The adjunctive use of MTZ+AMX significantly improved the clinical and microbiological outcomes of SRP in the treatment of type 2 diabetic subjects with ChP.