BACKGROUND: Volumetric features of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) are under the influence of many factors, including sampling variables. Standardizing such factors may enable a more precise methodology. Thus, analysis of the possible impact of the clinical periodontal status and the distinct location of sampling sites on fluid volume was performed. METHODS: Clinical parameters were recorded, and fluid samples were obtained from 931 maxillary sites. The potential site-specific volumetric differences among healthy, gingivitis, and periodontitis sites; between multirooted or single-rooted teeth and mesio-buccal or disto-buccal sampling sites; and the correlations between volume and clinical measures were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Although volume increased in a disease-related pattern (healthy < gingivitis < periodontitis; P <0.05), the distribution range of volume was widespread, with prominent overlaps between the different clinical periodontal conditions. Multirooted teeth presented more fluid volume, and even mesio-buccal or disto-buccal sites exhibited some volumetric differences (P <0.05). Constant correlations between volume and clinical parameters could be observed only at gingivitis sites (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of fluid volume is disease related in general. However, the wide range of volumetric distribution, the site-specific nature, and the clear impact of the distinct sampling site on volume are important volumetric features of this biologic fluid. Whenever possible, standardization of the extent of probing depth, degree of gingival inflammation, and distinct sampling area is likely to improve the reliability of GCF methodology.
BACKGROUND: Volumetric features of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) are under the influence of many factors, including sampling variables. Standardizing such factors may enable a more precise methodology. Thus, analysis of the possible impact of the clinical periodontal status and the distinct location of sampling sites on fluid volume was performed. METHODS: Clinical parameters were recorded, and fluid samples were obtained from 931 maxillary sites. The potential site-specific volumetric differences among healthy, gingivitis, and periodontitis sites; between multirooted or single-rooted teeth and mesio-buccal or disto-buccal sampling sites; and the correlations between volume and clinical measures were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Although volume increased in a disease-related pattern (healthy < gingivitis < periodontitis; P <0.05), the distribution range of volume was widespread, with prominent overlaps between the different clinical periodontal conditions. Multirooted teeth presented more fluid volume, and even mesio-buccal or disto-buccal sites exhibited some volumetric differences (P <0.05). Constant correlations between volume and clinical parameters could be observed only at gingivitis sites (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of fluid volume is disease related in general. However, the wide range of volumetric distribution, the site-specific nature, and the clear impact of the distinct sampling site on volume are important volumetric features of this biologic fluid. Whenever possible, standardization of the extent of probing depth, degree of gingival inflammation, and distinct sampling area is likely to improve the reliability of GCF methodology.
Authors: J M Grimm-Geris; S K Dunmire; L M Duval; E A Filtz; H J Leuschen; D O Schmeling; S L Kulasingam; H H Balfour Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 2.451