| Literature DB >> 31842932 |
Quynh C Nguyen1, Olivier Duverger2, Rashmi Mishra1, Gabriela Lopez Mitnik3, Priyam Jani1, Pamela A Frischmeyer-Guerrerio4, Janice S Lee5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) is a rare connective tissue disorder whose oral manifestations and dental phenotypes have not been well-characterized. The aim of this study was to explore the influence of oral manifestations on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in LDS patients.Entities:
Keywords: Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS); Oral health impact profile (OHIP-14); Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL); Rare connective tissue disorders; Rare diseases
Year: 2019 PMID: 31842932 PMCID: PMC6915860 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-019-1250-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis ISSN: 1750-1172 Impact factor: 4.123
Fig. 1Study Population Flowchart. OHIP-14 = Oral Health Impact Profile – 14 questionnaire, LDS-I = TGF-β receptor 1 mutation (TGFBR1), LDS-II = TGF-β receptor 2 mutation (TGFBR2), LDS-Others = SMAD3, TGFB2, and TGFB3 mutations combined
Fig. 2Representative Photos of Oral Manifestations in LDS Cohort. a High-arched and narrowed palate; b bifid uvula; c structural enamel defect includes pitting enamel and horizontal grooves on enamel surface; d malocclusion includes dental crowding and crossbite
Subject Characteristics
| Variables | LDS | UFM |
|---|---|---|
| Total subjects (n) | 33 | 16 |
| Gender | ||
| Male, % (n) | 48.5 (16) | 18.75 (3) |
| Female, % (n) | 51.5 (17) | 81.25 (13) |
| Age | ||
| Mean (Years) | 19.6# | 41.4 |
| SD | 15.1 | 6.11 |
| Range | 3–57 | 33–54 |
Statistical analyses: A paired sample t-test. #Significant compared to controls (p < 0.001)
LDS Loeys-Dietz Syndrome
UFM Unaffected Family Member
Comparison of OHIP-14 Scores by Age, Gender, Type of Mutation and Mode of Inheritance in LDS
| Variables | % (n) | OHIP-14 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ns | ||
| Childhood (< 11 yrs) | 30.3% (10) | 4.80 ± 6.3 | |
| Adolescence (> 11 to < 18 yrs) | 36.4% (12) | 5.17 ± 5.4 | |
| Adulthood (> 18 yrs) | 33.3% (11) | 8.18 ± 7.6 | |
| Gender | ns | ||
| Male | 48.5% (16) | 6.38 ± 6.6 | |
| Female | 51.5% (17) | 5.76 ± 6.5 | |
| Type of Mutation | ns | ||
| TGFBR1 | 45.4% (15) | 6.13 ± 7.4 | |
| TGFBR2 | 36.4% (12) | 6.00 ± 7.4 | |
| Others | 18.2% (6) | 6.00 ± 7.0 | |
| Mode of Inheritance | ns | ||
| Sporadic | 83.8% (26) | 6.50 ± 6.4 | |
| Familial | 21.2% (7) | 4.43 ± 6.9 |
Statistical analysis: Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was employed. ns not significant
Comparison of OHIP-14 Score between LDS and UFM
| OHIP-14 Domains | LDS | UFM | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OHIP-14 Mean ± SD | |||
| Functional Limitation | 0.85 ± 1.3 | 0.22 ± 0.6 | |
| Pain | 1.36 ± 1.5 | 0.41 ± 1.0 | |
| Discomfort | 1.15 ± 1.6 | 0.68 ± 1.3 | |
| Physical Disability | 0.88 ± 1.5 | 0.44 ± 0.9 | |
| Psychological Disability | 1.00 ± 1.3 | 0.46 ± 1.1 | |
| Social Disability | 0.52 ± 1.0 | 0.15 ± 0.4 | ns |
| Handicap | 0.30 ± 1.0 | 0.07 ± 0.3 | ns |
| Total OHIP-14 | 6.30 ± 6.4 | 1.50 ± 2.3 | |
Statistical analyses: Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was employed. ns not significant. Bold values are significant (p ≤ 0.05)
LDS Loeys-Dietz Syndrome
UFM Unaffected Family Members
Clinical Characteristics of Oral Health Self-Care Behavior in LDS
| Oral Health Self-Care Behavior Questions | Total LDS ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| % subjects (n) | OHIP-14 | ||
| aDo you receive regular dental care? | ns | ||
| Yes | 81.25 (26) | 5.35 ± 5.34 | |
| No | 18.75 (6) | 8.00 ± 8.10 | |
| aReason to visit the dentist | ns | ||
| Check-up, orthodontic treatment or cleaning | 75.00 (24) | 4.92 ± 4.90 | |
| Acute problem (Infection, Extraction, Filling) | 25.00 (8) | 8.63 ± 7.93 | |
| bOverall, how would you rate your hygiene routine (regular tooth brushing, flossing, and your home oral mouth rinse)? | ns | ||
| Poor | 6.25 (2) | 8.00 ± 9.90 | |
| Fair | 18.75 (6) | 8.33 ± 5.28 | |
| Good | 37.5 (12) | 5.92 ± 6.04 | |
| Very Good | 28.12 (9) | 5.44 ± 6.09 | |
| Excellent | 9.38 (3) | 0.33 ± 0.58 | |
| bOverall, how would you rate the health of your teeth and gums? (Oral health status) | |||
| Poor | 15.63 (5) | 13.20 ± 4.49 | |
| Fair | 18.75 (6) | 8.83 ± 4.71 | |
| Good | 34.38 (11) | 5.00 ± 5.59 | |
| Very Good | 25.00 (8) | 1.63 ± 1.99 | |
| Excellent | 6.25 (2) | 0 ± 0 | |
Statistical analyses: aWilcoxon Rank-Sum and bPearson Correlation Coefficient tests were employed. ns not significant. Bold values are significant (p ≤ 0.05)
Crude Model of OHIP-14 Scores in Respect to Each Abnormal Variable in LDS
| Oral manifestation feature | % subjects affected (n) | OHIP-14 | β Coefficient | Standard Error | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Five abnormal manifestations | |||||
| Malocclusion | 97.0 (32) | 6.41 ± 6.4 | 3.41 | 6.64 | ns |
| Abnormal soft and hard palate | 87.9 (29) | 6.03 ± 6.3 | −2.22 | 3.43 | ns |
| Gingivitis | 60.6 (20) | 7.00 ± 6.3 | 1.77 | 2.28 | ns |
| Hypersensitivity | 57.6 (19) | 8.53 ± 6.1 | 2.07 | ||
| TMJ abnormality | 42.4 (14) | 9.71 ± 6.7 | 2.01 | ||
| Two additional variables | |||||
| Self-reported poor-to-fair oral health status | 33.3 (11) | 10.82 ± 4.9 | 2.06 | ||
| Cumulation of oral manifestations (≥ 4) | 60.6 (20) | 9.15 ± 6.0 | 1.90 | ||
Statistical analyses: Crude regression model was employed. ns not significant. Bold values are significant (p ≤ 0.05)
Fig. 3Dot plots of significant Oral Manifestations in LDS Cohort. Hypersensitivity (a), TMJ abnormalities (b), oral health status (c), and quantity of anomalies (d) significantly affect OHIP-14 score. Statistical analyses: Mann-Whitney U test was employed
Correlation Between Significant Abnormal Manifestations and OHIP-14 Domains
| Dimension | Hypersensitivity | TMJ Abnormality | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | Yes | No | |||
| OHIP-14 Mean ± SD | OHIP-14 Mean ± SD | |||||
| Functional Limitation | 0.79 ± 1.1 | 0.93 ± 1.4 | ns | 1.14 ± 1.2 | 0.63 ± 1.3 | ns |
| Pain | 2.11 ± 1.5 | 0.50 ± 0.9 | 2.00 ± 1.7 | 1.00 ± 1.3 | ns | |
| Discomfort | 1.79 ± 1.8 | 0.64 ± 1.0 | 1.79 ± 1.5 | 0.95 ± 1.6 | ns | |
| Physical Disability | 1.26 ± 1.8 | 0.43 ± 1.1 | ns | 1.71 ± 1.9 | 0.32 ± 0.9 | |
| Psychological Disability | 1.47 ± 1.5 | 0.36 ± 0.7 | 1.50 ± 1.3 | 0.63 ± 1.2 | ||
| Social Disability | 0.68 ± 1.1 | 0.29 ± 0.7 | ns | 0.93 ± 1.2 | 0.21 ± 0.6 | |
| Handicap | 0.42 ± 1.2 | 0.14 ± 0.5 | ns | 0.64 ± 1.4 | 0.05 ± 0.2 | ns |
Statistical analyses: Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was employed. ns not significant. Bold values are significant (p ≤ 0.05)