Archives of oral biology · 2026
Is salivary melatonin an indicator of periodontal disease severity? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Santos Rodrigo Martins Dos, Gonçalves Franciane Duarte, Carneiro Liliane Moretti, Mattera Maria Sara de Lima Coutinho, Nobumoto Ana Carla Thalez Ywabuchi, Belardi Bianca Elvira, Tsosura Thais Verônica Saori, Dias Gabriel Zopolatto Turci, Tessarin Gestter Willian Lattari, Chiba Fernando Yamamoto
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate, through a systematic review and meta-analysis, the differences in salivary melatonin (S-MEL) levels between individuals with periodontal disease and healthy individuals.
DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, SciELO, LILACS, and BIREME following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and PROSPERO registration. Human studies comparing patients with periodontal disease with healthy controls and reporting S-MEL were included. Screening occurred in two phases. Meta-analysis was performed in Jamovi using the MAJOR module, applying the standardized mean difference (SMD) (Hedges g), a random-effects model, heterogeneity statistics, and publication bias tests. Seventeen comparisons were included.
RESULTS: The random-effects model showed significantly lower S-MEL levels in patients with periodontal disease (SMD = -2.04; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -3.44 to -0.63; p = 0.005), with high heterogeneity (I² = 97.8 %). Notably, most studies reported reduced melatonin levels, despite a few positive effects. Funnel plot asymmetry and Begg/Egger tests suggested publication bias, although trim-and-fill revealed no missing studies. The high fail-safe N supported the robustness of the findings.
CONCLUSIONS: S-MEL levels were consistently lower in patients with periodontal disease, suggesting a potential biomarker relationship. Despite the substantial heterogeneity, the overall evidence supports this association. However, further standardized studies are needed.
DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, SciELO, LILACS, and BIREME following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and PROSPERO registration. Human studies comparing patients with periodontal disease with healthy controls and reporting S-MEL were included. Screening occurred in two phases. Meta-analysis was performed in Jamovi using the MAJOR module, applying the standardized mean difference (SMD) (Hedges g), a random-effects model, heterogeneity statistics, and publication bias tests. Seventeen comparisons were included.
RESULTS: The random-effects model showed significantly lower S-MEL levels in patients with periodontal disease (SMD = -2.04; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -3.44 to -0.63; p = 0.005), with high heterogeneity (I² = 97.8 %). Notably, most studies reported reduced melatonin levels, despite a few positive effects. Funnel plot asymmetry and Begg/Egger tests suggested publication bias, although trim-and-fill revealed no missing studies. The high fail-safe N supported the robustness of the findings.
CONCLUSIONS: S-MEL levels were consistently lower in patients with periodontal disease, suggesting a potential biomarker relationship. Despite the substantial heterogeneity, the overall evidence supports this association. However, further standardized studies are needed.