| Literature DB >> 31543613 |
Chethana Kunthur Chidambar1, Shrinidhi Maji Shankar1, Pooja Raghu1, Soumya Badravalli Gururaj1, Kala Shashi Bushan1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enterococcus faecalis is a Gram-positive, facultative anaerobic coccus that can survive under harsh conditions. Studies have shown a positive relationship between biofilm formation and gelE gene expression in E. faecalis. The production of gelatinase (MMP 2) has been detected in 50% of E. faecalis isolates from endodontic and periodontal infections, which suggests its role in the pathogenesis of apical and marginal periodontitis. Although E. faecalis is not considered a periodontopathogen, this species has been more frequently detected in subgingival samples with periodontitis than from periodontally healthy subjects, suggesting that the local conditions in periodontitis may favor its colonization. Hence, the aim of the current study was to detect and compare the presence of E. faecalis in subgingival biofilms of healthy, gingivitis, and periodontitis subjects.Entities:
Keywords: Chronic periodontitis; Enterococcus faecalis; gelatinase; subgingival biofilm
Year: 2019 PMID: 31543613 PMCID: PMC6737857 DOI: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_44_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Indian Soc Periodontol ISSN: 0972-124X
Comparison of the plaque index score, gingival index score and clinical attachment level for the three groups
| Group | Mean | SD | Minimum | Maximum | Quartiles | Test statistic | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Median | Q3 | IQR | ||||||||
| PI | Periodontitis | 0.80 | 0.57 | 0.00 | 2.00 | 0.31 | 0.60 | 1.30 | 0.99 | <0.001 | |
| Gingivitis | 0.31 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.12 | 0.26 | 0.40 | 0.28 | |||
| Healthy | 0.017 | 0.038 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
| GI | Periodontitis | 2.18 | 2.44 | 1.00 | 17.00 | 1.60 | 1.70 | 1.98 | 0.38 | <0.001 | |
| Gingivitis | 1.56 | 0.33 | 0.87 | 2.10 | 1.35 | 1.60 | 1.80 | 0.45 | |||
| Healthy | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
| CAL | Periodontitis | 1.67 | 0.43 | 0.50 | 2.37 | 1.30 | 1.70 | 2.08 | 0.78 | <0.001 | |
| Gingivitis | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
| Healthy | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
P value 0f 0.05 were considered significant. IQR – Interquartile range; SD – Standard deviation; PI – Plaque index; GI – Gingival index; CAL – Clinical attachment loss; P – Probability value; χ2 – Chi squared test statistics
Comparison of the mean plaque index score, gingival index score, and clinical attachment level for the three groups
| Group | Mean rank | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| PI | Periodontitis | 48 | 68.56 |
| Gingivitis | 34 | 45.21 | |
| Healthy | 18 | 12.33 | |
| GI | Periodontitis | 48 | 64.31 |
| Gingivitis | 34 | 52.71 | |
| Healthy | 18 | 9.50 | |
| CAL | Periodontitis | 48 | 76.50 |
| Gingivitis | 34 | 26.50 | |
| Healthy | 18 | 26.50 |
PI – Plaque index; GI – Gingival index; CAL – Clinical attachment loss; n – Number of subjects
Comparison of the presence of Enterococcus faecalis between periodontitis and gingivitis groups
| Frequency (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | |||
| Present | Absent | ||
| Group | |||
| Periodontitis | 20 (41.7) | 28 (58.3) | 48 (58.54) |
| Gingivitis | 2 (5.9) | 32 (94.1) | 34 (41.46) |
| Total | 22 (26.8) | 60 (73.2) | 82 (100.0) |
| 12.98, <0.001 | |||
χ2 – Chi squared test statistics; P – Probability value