-
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jul 2020The recently introduced 2017 World Workshop on the classification of periodontitis, incorporating stages and grades of disease, aims to link disease classification with...
BACKGROUND
The recently introduced 2017 World Workshop on the classification of periodontitis, incorporating stages and grades of disease, aims to link disease classification with approaches to prevention and treatment, as it describes not only disease severity and extent but also the degree of complexity and an individual's risk. There is, therefore, a need for evidence-based clinical guidelines providing recommendations to treat periodontitis.
AIM
The objective of the current project was to develop a S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for the treatment of Stage I-III periodontitis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This S3 CPG was developed under the auspices of the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP), following the methodological guidance of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The rigorous and transparent process included synthesis of relevant research in 15 specifically commissioned systematic reviews, evaluation of the quality and strength of evidence, the formulation of specific recommendations and consensus, on those recommendations, by leading experts and a broad base of stakeholders.
RESULTS
The S3 CPG approaches the treatment of periodontitis (stages I, II and III) using a pre-established stepwise approach to therapy that, depending on the disease stage, should be incremental, each including different interventions. Consensus was achieved on recommendations covering different interventions, aimed at (a) behavioural changes, supragingival biofilm, gingival inflammation and risk factor control; (b) supra- and sub-gingival instrumentation, with and without adjunctive therapies; (c) different types of periodontal surgical interventions; and (d) the necessary supportive periodontal care to extend benefits over time.
CONCLUSION
This S3 guideline informs clinical practice, health systems, policymakers and, indirectly, the public on the available and most effective modalities to treat periodontitis and to maintain a healthy dentition for a lifetime, according to the available evidence at the time of publication.
Topics: Germany; Gingivitis; Health Behavior; Humans; Periodontics; Periodontitis
PubMed: 32383274
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13290 -
The Chinese Journal of Dental Research Mar 2023In recent years, as the number of adults seeking orthodontic treatment has increased, so too has the number of periodontal tissue problems, particularly regarding the... (Review)
Review
In recent years, as the number of adults seeking orthodontic treatment has increased, so too has the number of periodontal tissue problems, particularly regarding the impact on periodontal tissue of receiving orthodontic treatment. Orthodontic treatment improves the occlusion and appearance of teeth by moving the teeth appropriately. These movements have a significant impact on the interactions between the teeth and periodontal tissues. Orthodontic treatment can also recover tooth alignment for patients with tooth displacement caused by periodontitis; however, orthodontic treatment also often has adverse effects on periodontal soft tissue, such as gingivitis, gingival enlargement and gingival recession. The purpose of this review is to summarise the current evidence and solid knowledge of periodontal soft tissue problems in orthodontic treatment and outline some prevention strategies.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Gingiva; Gingivitis; Periodontitis; Gingival Recession; Periodontium; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 36988062
DOI: 10.3290/j.cjdr.b3978667 -
Frontiers in Bioscience (Elite Edition) Jul 2022Orthodontic treatment has become increasingly popular due to its benefits in improving facial and smile aesthetics, self-esteem and the function of the stomatognathic...
Orthodontic treatment has become increasingly popular due to its benefits in improving facial and smile aesthetics, self-esteem and the function of the stomatognathic apparatus. However, orthodontic appliances make it more difficult to brush teeth effectively, as they interfere with tooth brushing and facilitate the accumulation of dental plaque (biofilm), which induces a quantitative and qualitative change in the oral microbiota. It can cause several adverse effects, such as gingivitis, periodontitis, white spot lesions (WSL), caries and halitosis, induced by an increase in periodontopathogenic and cariogenic bacteria. Therefore, this article resumes the main findings on the changes in the oral microbiota induced by different orthodontic appliances (removable, fixed and clear aligners) and gives some practical strategies in order to reduce the impact and/or incidence of local dental/periodontal complications.
Topics: Biofilms; Gingivitis; Humans; Microbiota; Orthodontic Appliances; Periodontitis
PubMed: 36137992
DOI: 10.31083/j.fbe1403019 -
Periodontology 2000 Jun 2020Periodontitis is a complex disease: (a) various causative factors play a role simultaneously and interact with each other; and (b) the disease is episodic in nature, and... (Review)
Review
Periodontitis is a complex disease: (a) various causative factors play a role simultaneously and interact with each other; and (b) the disease is episodic in nature, and bursts of disease activity can be recognized, ie, the disease develops and cycles in a nonlinear fashion. We recognize that various causative factors determine the immune blueprint and, consequently, the immune fitness of a subject. Normally, the host lives in a state of homeostasis or symbiosis with the oral microbiome; however, disturbances in homeostatic balance can occur, because of an aberrant host response (inherited and/or acquired during life). This imbalance results from hyper- or hyporesponsiveness and/or lack of sufficient resolution of inflammation, which in turn is responsible for much of the disease destruction seen in periodontitis. The control of this destruction by anti-inflammatory processes and proresolution processes limits the destruction to the tissues surrounding the teeth. The local inflammatory processes can also become systemic, which in turn affect organs such as the heart. Gingival inflammation also elicits changes in the ecology of the subgingival environment providing optimal conditions for the outgrowth of gram-negative, anaerobic species, which become pathobionts and can propagate periodontal inflammation and can further negatively impact immune fitness. The factors that determine immune fitness are often the same factors that determine the response to the resident biofilm, and are clustered as follows: (a) genetic and epigenetic factors; (b) lifestyle factors, such as smoking, diet, and psychosocial conditions; (c) comorbidities, such as diabetes; and (d) local and dental factors, as well as randomly determined factors (stochasticity). Of critical importance are the pathobionts in a dysbiotic biofilm that drive the viscious cycle. Focusing on genetic factors, currently variants in at least 65 genes have been suggested as being associated with periodontitis based on genome-wide association studies and candidate gene case control studies. These studies have found pleiotropy between periodontitis and cardiovascular diseases. Most of these studies point to potential pathways in the pathogenesis of periodontal disease. Also, most contribute to a small portion of the total risk profile of periodontitis, often limited to specific racial and ethnic groups. To date, 4 genetic loci are shared between atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and periodontitis, ie, CDKN2B-AS1(ANRIL), a conserved noncoding element within CAMTA1 upstream of VAMP3, PLG, and a haplotype block at the VAMP8 locus. The shared genes suggest that periodontitis is not causally related to atherosclerotic diseases, but rather both conditions are sequelae of similar (the same?) aberrant inflammatory pathways. In addition to variations in genomic sequences, epigenetic modifications of DNA can affect the genetic blueprint of the host responses. This emerging field will yield new valuable information about susceptibility to periodontitis and subsequent persisting inflammatory reactions in periodontitis. Further studies are required to verify and expand our knowledge base before final cause and effect conclusions about the role of inflammation and genetic factors in periodontitis can be made.
Topics: Genome-Wide Association Study; Gingivitis; Humans; Inflammation; Periodontal Diseases; Periodontitis
PubMed: 32385877
DOI: 10.1111/prd.12297 -
Proceedings of the National Academy of... Jul 2021Oral commensal bacteria actively participate with gingival tissue to maintain healthy neutrophil surveillance and normal tissue and bone turnover processes. Disruption...
Oral commensal bacteria actively participate with gingival tissue to maintain healthy neutrophil surveillance and normal tissue and bone turnover processes. Disruption of this homeostatic host-bacteria relationship occurs during experimental gingivitis studies where it has been clearly established that increases in the bacterial burden increase gingival inflammation. Here, we show that experimental gingivitis resulted in three unique clinical inflammatory phenotypes (high, low, and slow) and reveal that interleukin-1β, a reported major gingivitis-associated inflammatory mediator, was not associated with clinical gingival inflammation in the slow response group. In addition, significantly higher levels of spp. were also unique to this group. The low clinical response group was characterized by low concentrations of host mediators, despite similar bacterial accumulation and compositional characteristics as the high clinical response group. Neutrophil and bone activation modulators were down-regulated in all response groups, revealing novel tissue and bone protective responses during gingival inflammation. These alterations in chemokine and microbial composition responses during experimental gingivitis reveal a previously uncharacterized variation in the human host response to a disruption in gingival homeostasis. Understanding this human variation in gingival inflammation may facilitate the identification of periodontitis-susceptible individuals. Overall, this study underscores the variability in host responses in the human population arising from variations in host immune profiles (low responders) and microbial community maturation (slow responders) that may impact clinical outcomes in terms of destructive inflammation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Bone and Bones; Chemokines; Gingiva; Gingivitis; Homeostasis; Humans; Inflammation; Phylogeny; Time Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 34193520
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2012578118 -
The Veterinary Clinics of North... Sep 2020Feline chronic gingivostomatitis is a frustrating disease to manage owing to its elusive etiopathogenesis and its subsequently suboptimal treatment options.... (Review)
Review
Feline chronic gingivostomatitis is a frustrating disease to manage owing to its elusive etiopathogenesis and its subsequently suboptimal treatment options. Nevertheless, efforts to shed light on the disease over the past few decades have advanced the knowledge on its potential etiopathogenesis and the success rates of available treatment options. Further research is ongoing, with promising attempts to better understand and treat this, likely, multifactorial disease.
Topics: Animals; Cat Diseases; Cats; Chronic Disease; Gingivitis
PubMed: 32360016
DOI: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2020.04.002 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Aug 2019To explore the M1/M2 status of macrophage polarization from healthy, gingivitis, and periodontitis patient samples.
AIM
To explore the M1/M2 status of macrophage polarization from healthy, gingivitis, and periodontitis patient samples.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Gingival biopsies were collected from 42 individuals (14 gingivitis, 18 periodontitis, and 10 healthy samples) receiving periodontal therapy. Histomorphology analysis was performed with haematoxylin and eosin staining. Immunofluorescence was performed using a combination of CD68 (macrophages), iNOS (M1), and CD206 (M2) in order to acquire changes in macrophage polarization at a single-cell resolution. Macrophages were quantified under microscopy using narrow wavelength filters to detect Alexa 488, Alexa 568, Alexa 633 fluorophores, and Hoechst 33342 to identify cellular DNA content.
RESULTS
Gingivitis and periodontitis samples showed higher levels of macrophages compared with healthy samples. Unexpectedly, periodontitis samples displayed lower levels of macrophages dispersed in the stromal tissues compared with gingivitis samples; however, it remained higher than healthy tissues. The polarization of macrophages appears to be reduced in periodontitis and showed similar levels to those observed in healthy tissues.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study found that gingivitis and periodontitis differ from each other by the levels of macrophage infiltrate, but not by changes in macrophage polarization.
Topics: Gingiva; Gingivitis; Humans; Macrophages; Periodontal Diseases; Periodontitis
PubMed: 31152604
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13156 -
Swiss Dental Journal Oct 2019These guidelines address the administration of systemic antibiotics in periodontics, especially in the treatment of periodontitis, necrotizing...
These guidelines address the administration of systemic antibiotics in periodontics, especially in the treatment of periodontitis, necrotizing gingivitis/periodontitis, periodontal abscess and periimplantitis. Microorganisms associated with these conditions aggregate as structured biofilms on tooth surfaces, and biofilms effectively protect microorganisms from antibiotics. It is therefore a central principle to use antibiotics only as adjunct to mechanical debridement. In fact, many cases can be resolved by mechanical therapy even without the prescription of antibiotics. Good oral hygiene is crucial for longterm success.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dental Implants; Gingivitis; Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Periodontics; Periodontitis
PubMed: 31607436
DOI: No ID Found -
Archives of Oral Biology Jul 2023in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD), oral health can be affected by motor and non-motor symptoms and/or medication use. Therefore, the aim was to systematically... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD), oral health can be affected by motor and non-motor symptoms and/or medication use. Therefore, the aim was to systematically review the literature on oral health and associated factors of oral health in PD patients.
DESIGN
a literature search was performed from inception up to April 5th, 2023. Original studies that assessed oral health-related factors in PD patients and were written in English or Dutch, were included.
RESULTS
11276 articles were identified, of which 43 met the inclusion criteria (quality range poor-good). A higher prevalence of dental biofilm, bleeding/gingivitis, pocket depth (≥4 mm), tooth mobility, caries, and number of decayed missing filled teeth/surfaces was found in PD patients than in controls. However, no difference between both groups was found when analysing edentulism and wearing dentures. Poor oral health of PD patients was associated with a longer disease duration, higher disease severity, and more prescribed medications.
CONCLUSIONS
oral health of PD patients is worse than that of healthy individuals. It is associated with the duration and severity of PD and medication use. Therefore, we advise regular appointments with oral health care professionals, with an important focus on prevention.
Topics: Humans; Oral Health; Dental Caries; Parkinson Disease; Gingivitis; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 37120970
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2023.105712 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Without a phase of retention after successful orthodontic treatment, teeth tend to 'relapse', that is, to return to their initial position. Retention is achieved by... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Without a phase of retention after successful orthodontic treatment, teeth tend to 'relapse', that is, to return to their initial position. Retention is achieved by fitting fixed or removable retainers to provide stability to the teeth while avoiding damage to teeth and gums. Removable retainers can be worn full- or part-time. Retainers vary in shape, material, and the way they are made. Adjunctive procedures are sometimes used to try to improve retention, for example, reshaping teeth where they contact ('interproximal reduction'), or cutting fibres around teeth ('percision'). This review is an update of one originally published in 2004 and last updated in 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of different retainers and retention strategies used to stabilise tooth position after orthodontic braces.
SEARCH METHODS
An information specialist searched Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and OpenGrey up to 27 April 2022 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving children and adults who had retainers fitted or adjunctive procedures undertaken to prevent relapse following orthodontic treatment with braces. We excluded studies with aligners.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened eligible studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Outcomes were stability or relapse of tooth position, retainer failure (i.e. broken, detached, worn out, ill-fitting or lost), adverse effects on teeth and gums (i.e. plaque, gingival and bleeding indices), and participant satisfaction. We calculated mean differences (MD) for continuous data, risk ratios (RR) or risk differences (RD) for dichotomous data, and hazard ratios (HR) for survival data, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses when similar studies reported outcomes at the same time point; otherwise results were reported as mean ranges. We prioritised reporting of Little's Irregularity Index (crookedness of anterior teeth) to measure relapse, judging the minimum important difference to be 1 mm.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 47 studies, with 4377 participants. The studies evaluated: removable versus fixed retainers (8 studies); different types of fixed retainers (22 studies) or bonding materials (3 studies); and different types of removable retainers (16 studies). Four studies evaluated more than one comparison. We judged 28 studies to have high risk of bias, 11 to have low risk, and eight studies as unclear. We focused on 12-month follow-up. The evidence is low or very low certainty. Most comparisons and outcomes were evaluated in only one study at high risk of bias, and most studies measured outcomes after less than a year. Removable versus fixed retainers Removable (part-time) versus fixed One study reported that participants wearing clear plastic retainers part-time in the lower arch had more relapse than participants with multistrand fixed retainers, but the amount was not clinically significant (Little's Irregularity Index (LII) MD 0.92 mm, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.61; 56 participants). Removable retainers were more likely to cause discomfort (RR 12.22; 95% CI 1.69 to 88.52; 57 participants), but were associated with less retainer failure (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.98; 57 participants) and better periodontal health (Gingival Index (GI) MD -0.34, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.02; 59 participants). Removable (full-time) versus fixed One study reported that removable clear plastic retainers worn full-time in the lower arch did not provide any clinically significant benefit for tooth stability over fixed retainers (LII MD 0.60 mm, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.03; 84 participants). Participants with clear plastic retainers had better periodontal health (gingival bleeding RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88; 84 participants), but higher risk of retainer failure (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.38 to 8.47; 77 participants). The study found no difference between retainers for caries. Different types of fixed retainers Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) nitinol versus conventional/analogue multistrand One study reported that CAD/CAM nitinol fixed retainers were better for tooth stability, but the difference was not clinically significant (LII MD -0.46 mm, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.21; 66 participants). There was no evidence of a difference between retainers for periodontal health (GI MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.16; 2 studies, 107 participants), or retainer survival (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.49; 1 study, 41 participants). Fibre-reinforced composite versus conventional multistrand/spiral wire One study reported that fibre-reinforced composite fixed retainers provided better stability than multistrand retainers, but this was not of a clinically significant amount (LII MD -0.70 mm, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.23; 52 participants). The fibre-reinforced retainers had better patient satisfaction with aesthetics (MD 1.49 cm on a visual analogue scale, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.22; 1 study, 32 participants), and similar retainer survival rates (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.21; 7 studies; 1337 participants) at 12 months. However, failures occurred earlier (MD -1.48 months, 95% CI -1.88 to -1.08; 2 studies, 103 participants; 24-month follow-up) and more gingival inflammation at six months, though bleeding on probing (BoP) was similar (GI MD 0.59, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; BoP MD 0.33, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.79; 1 study, 40 participants). Different types of removable retainers Clear plastic versus Hawley When worn in the lower arch for six months full-time and six months part-time, clear plastic provided similar stability to Hawley retainers (LII MD 0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.65 to 0.67; 1 study, 30 participants). Hawley retainers had lower risk of failure (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.83; 1 study, 111 participants), but were less comfortable at six months (VAS MD -1.86 cm, 95% CI -2.19 to -1.53; 1 study, 86 participants). Part-time versus full-time wear of Hawley There was no evidence of a difference in stability between part-time and full-time use of Hawley retainers (MD 0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.68; 1 study, 52 participants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is low to very low certainty, so we cannot draw firm conclusions about any one approach to retention over another. More high-quality studies are needed that measure tooth stability over at least two years, and measure how long retainers last, patient satisfaction and negative side effects from wearing retainers, such as tooth decay and gum disease.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Orthodontic Brackets; Dental Care; Gingivitis; Periodontal Diseases; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37219527
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002283.pub5