| Literature DB >> 25888404 |
Hanane Chahboun1, Maria Minguez Arnau2, David Herrera3, Mariano Sanz4, Oum Keltoum Ennibi5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aggressive periodontitis (AgP) is one of the most severe forms of periodontal diseases. In Morocco, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans has been strongly associated with AgP, however limited knowledge is available about the implication of other periodontal pathogens in this entity. Therefore, the main aim of this study was to evaluate the composition of the subgingival microbiota in Moroccan patients with AgP.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25888404 PMCID: PMC4367901 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-015-0006-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Demographic and clinical data in aggressive (localized and generalized) and chronic periodontitis groups
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 11/2 (84.6%) | 29/8 (78.4%) | 16/4 (80.0%) | >0.05 |
|
| 19.85 ± 4.616 (13; 26) | 24.43 ± 5.058 (17; 36) | 28.55 ± 4.347 (21; 35) | <0.001 |
|
| 36.6% (25.9 - 72.5) | 80.4% (53.9 - 100.0) | 56.2% (45.1 - 76.0) | 0.001 |
|
| 30.2% (23.1 - 68.9) | 76.8% (59.1 – 100.0) | 46.4% (33.7 - 59.9) | 0.000 |
|
| 6.23 ± 1.25 | 6.05 ± 0.95 | 4.46 ± 0.59 | <0.001 |
|
| 6.03 ± 1.94 | 5.18 ± 1.39 | 3.09 ± 1.20 | <0.001 |
*P value for multiple comparisons by means on ANOVA. Statistically significant differences corresponded to.
Age: LAgP vs GAgP, p = 0.006; LAgP vs ChP, p <0.001; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.003.
Plaque index: LAgP vs GAgP, p = 0.001; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.008.
Bleeding on probing: LAgP vs GAgP, p < 0.001; GAgP vs ChP, p <0.001.
Probing pocket depth: GAgP vs ChP, p < 0.001; LAgP vs ChP, p < 0.001.
Clinical attachment level: GAgP vs ChP, p < 0.001; LAgP vs ChP, p < 0.001.
Frequencies of detection [n positive (percentage)] of studied bacteria in aggressive periodontitis compared to chronic periodontitis
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 6 (46.2%) | 24 (64.9%) | 30 (60.0%) | 5 (25.0%) |
|
| 8 (61.5%) | 33 (89.2%) | 41 (82.0%) | 12 (60.0%) |
|
| 11 (84.6%) | 32 (86.5%) | 43 (86.0%) | 18 (90.0%) |
|
| 6 (46.2%) | 24 (64.9%) | 30 (60.0%) | 11 (45.0%) |
|
| 1 (7.7%) | 11 (29.7%) | 12(24.0%) | 4 (20.0%) |
|
| 2 (15.4%) | 5 (13.5%) | 7(15.0%) | 3 (15.0%) |
|
| 10 (76.9%) | 31(82.4%) | 41(82.0%) | 16 (80.0%) |
|
| 4 (30.8%) | 10 (27.0%) | 14(28.0%) | 7 (35.0%) |
|
| 6 (46.2%) | 9 (24.3%) | 15(30.0%) | 3 (15.0%) |
*Statistically significant differences were detected, by means of Chi-square or Fisher Exact test, for.
A.actinomycetemcomitans: AgP vs ChP, p = 0.080; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.004.
P. gingivalis: GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.016; GAgP vs LAgP, p = 0.040.
Proportions (expressed as mean and standard deviation -sd) of total anaerobic microflora, isolated by culture in localized, generalized aggressive and chronic periodontitis
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 18.16% | 29.10% | 11.55% | 38.81% | 0.05% | 0.18% | 0.004 |
|
| 12.49% | 15.21% | 28.25% | 27.04% | 13.78% | 18.39% | 0.038 |
|
| 5.78% | 7.07% | 4.92% | 7.20% | 4.78% | 7.97% | 0.598 |
|
| 1.32% | 2.58% | 5.52% | 8.32% | 3.03% | 7.76% | 0.028 |
|
| 0.09% | 0.34% | 0.91% | 2.40% | 1.18% | 2.96% | 0.298 |
|
| 0.55% | 1.79% | 0.08% | 0.26% | 0.10% | 0.34% | 0.958 |
|
| 1.96% | 3.52% | 1.43% | 2.11% | 1.90% | 1.59% | 0.266 |
|
| 0.67% | 1.59% | 0.93% | 3.08% | 0.12% | 0.25% | 0.902 |
|
| 0.44% | 0.87% | 0.28% | 1.00% | 0.18% | 0.40% | 0.457 |
*Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the three groups; detected differences were explored by means of Mann Whitney test to compare two groups. Differences corresponded to.
A.actinomycetemcomitans: LAgP vs ChP, p = 0.062; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.001.
P. gingivalis: LAgP vs GAgP, p = 0.064; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.014.
T. forsythia: LAgP vs GAgP, p = 0.027; GAgP vs ChP, p = 0.045.
Total anaerobic counts and counts of selected bacterial species (in logarithm, expressed as mean and standard deviation –sd) in localized, generalized and chronic periodontitis
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8.41 | 0.69 | 8.90 | 0.62 | 8.47 | 0.52 | 0.011 |
|
| 2.62 | 2.99 | 3.32 | 2.62 | 0.81 | 1.47 | 0.019 |
|
| 3.93 | 2.81 | 5.37 | 2.35 | 3.52 | 3.01 | 0.030 |
|
| 4.35 | 2.14 | 4.79 | 1.85 | 3.95 | 1.99 | 0.297 |
|
| 2.11 | 2.79 | 3.81 | 2.88 | 2.44 | 2.61 | 0.084 |
|
| 0.39 | 1.42 | 1.47 | 2.33 | 1.03 | 2.13 | 0.290 |
|
| 0.79 | 1.94 | 0.61 | 1.58 | 0.69 | 1.69 | 0.939 |
|
| 3.15 | 2.23 | 4.05 | 1.88 | 3.98 | 1.82 | 0.337 |
|
| 1.28 | 2.03 | 1.41 | 2.22 | 1.23 | 1.95 | 0.953 |
|
| 1.60 | 2.16 | 1.09 | 2.19 | 0.94 | 1.71 | 0.655 |
*ANOVA test was used to compare all groups, and multiple range tests to identify the explanation of the detected differences.
Total counts: GAgP, versus LAgP and ChP.
A. actinomycetemcomitans: ChP, versus LApP and GAgP.
P. gingivalis : GAgP versus ChP.