Linda Sun Liu1, Nikolaos Gkranias2, Bruna Farias3, Dave Spratt4, Nikolaos Donos5. 1. Periodontology Unit, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK. 2. Centre for Oral Clinical Research, Institute of Dentistry, Barts & The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), Turner Street, London, UK. 3. Postgraduate Department, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil. 4. Microbiology Department, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK. 5. Centre for Oral Clinical Research, Institute of Dentistry, Barts & The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), Turner Street, London, UK. n.donos@qmul.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the available evidence in the literature in regard to the subgingival microbial population of chronic periodontitis in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM+PD) compared to non-diabetic subjects (NDM+PD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted at Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE database from 1980 to 2016, supplemented by hand searching as needed. Studies presenting with at least one of the primary outcomes (presence of any subgingival microorganisms, proportion and/or the amount of any subgingival plaque bacteria in T2DM+PD versus NDM+PD) were included. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently and in duplicate. RESULTS: From 611 citations, 19 full-text papers were screened and 11 articles were included for critical appraisal by both reviewers. Some evidence of a difference in the microbial profile between chronic PD subjects with and without T2DM was identified. The strength of evidence is strongest in Tannerella forthysia (T .forsythia) which was reported to be less frequent in the diabetic (T2DM+PD) group in five of the studies, followed by a weaker strength of evidence for other periodontal pathogens such as Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans), which were also found less frequent in the diabetic (T2DM+PD) group . CONCLUSION: Only few studies have compared T2DM+PD with NDM+PD. It is therefore strongly recommended that further studies which include four distinct groups of participants (NDM+PD, T2DM+PD, NDM+NPD, T2DM+NPD) instead of using intra-subject comparisons between healthy and diseased sites of the same subjects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Differences in bacterial populations of T2DM+PD in comparison to NDM+PD subjects may indicate the need of different protocols for the treatment of the diabetic patients with periodontal disease.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the available evidence in the literature in regard to the subgingival microbial population of chronic periodontitis in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM+PD) compared to non-diabetic subjects (NDM+PD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted at Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE database from 1980 to 2016, supplemented by hand searching as needed. Studies presenting with at least one of the primary outcomes (presence of any subgingival microorganisms, proportion and/or the amount of any subgingival plaque bacteria in T2DM+PD versus NDM+PD) were included. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently and in duplicate. RESULTS: From 611 citations, 19 full-text papers were screened and 11 articles were included for critical appraisal by both reviewers. Some evidence of a difference in the microbial profile between chronic PD subjects with and without T2DM was identified. The strength of evidence is strongest in Tannerella forthysia (T .forsythia) which was reported to be less frequent in the diabetic (T2DM+PD) group in five of the studies, followed by a weaker strength of evidence for other periodontal pathogens such as Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans), which were also found less frequent in the diabetic (T2DM+PD) group . CONCLUSION: Only few studies have compared T2DM+PD with NDM+PD. It is therefore strongly recommended that further studies which include four distinct groups of participants (NDM+PD, T2DM+PD, NDM+NPD, T2DM+NPD) instead of using intra-subject comparisons between healthy and diseased sites of the same subjects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Differences in bacterial populations of T2DM+PD in comparison to NDM+PD subjects may indicate the need of different protocols for the treatment of the diabeticpatients with periodontal disease.
Authors: P J Pérez-Chaparro; C Gonçalves; L C Figueiredo; M Faveri; E Lobão; N Tamashiro; P Duarte; M Feres Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2014-07-29 Impact factor: 6.116
Authors: Alan W Walker; Sylvia H Duncan; E Carol McWilliam Leitch; Matthew W Child; Harry J Flint Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: C Toomes; J James; A J Wood; C L Wu; D McCormick; N Lench; C Hewitt; L Moynihan; E Roberts; C G Woods; A Markham; M Wong; R Widmer; K A Ghaffar; M Pemberton; I R Hussein; S A Temtamy; R Davies; A P Read; P Sloan; M J Dixon; N S Thakker Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: H L Collin; M Uusitupa; L Niskanen; V Kontturi-Närhi; H Markkanen; A M Koivisto; J H Meurman Journal: J Periodontol Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 6.993
Authors: Bo Liu; Lina L Faller; Niels Klitgord; Varun Mazumdar; Mohammad Ghodsi; Daniel D Sommer; Theodore R Gibbons; Todd J Treangen; Yi-Chien Chang; Shan Li; O Colin Stine; Hatice Hasturk; Simon Kasif; Daniel Segrè; Mihai Pop; Salomon Amar Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Adriana-Patricia Rodríguez-Hernández; María de Lourdes Márquez-Corona; América Patricia Pontigo-Loyola; Carlo Eduardo Medina-Solís; Laurie-Ann Ximenez-Fyvie Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-08-31 Impact factor: 3.390