Journal of periodontal research · 2016
Relation between periodontal disease and arterial stiffness.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nicolosi L N, Lewin P G, Rudzinski J J, Pompeo M, Guanca F, Rodríguez P, Gelpi R J, Rubio M C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Periodontal disease has been described as playing a role in the atherosclerosis process, and its relation with intimal thickness and vascular endothelial function (EF) has been investigated. The present study sought to determine whether there are differences in parameters of arterial stiffness and EF between patients with and without severe periodontal disease (SPD).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients referred to the School of Dentistry University of Buenos Aires, were assessed. Demographic characteristics, atherogenic risk factors and concomitant pathologies were recorded. Patients with known cardiovascular pathology were excluded. Using carotid Doppler ultrasound an operator assessed arterial stiffness parameters: compliance, elastic modulus (EM), β stiffness index (βSI) and vascular EF by brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation. The patients were divided into two groups: with and without SPD.
RESULTS: Forty patients were included; 60% were women; 15 were in the SPD group and 25 in the group without SPD. Respective results of the studied variables were: age 56.53 ± 17.58 vs. 51.12 ± 12.97 years (NS); probing depth 2.53 ± 1.30 (95% CI 1.81-3.25) vs. 1.25 ± 0.51 (95% CI 1.31-1.73) p = 0.02; clinical attachment level 4.80 ± 2.00 (95% CI 3.69-5.91) vs. 1.72 ± 0.93 (95% CI 1.33-2.11) p = 0.001; intimal thickness 0.10 ± 0.17 (95% CI 0.095-0.11) vs. 0.82 ± 0.18 (95% CI 0.074-0.98) (NS); EM 48.33 ± 12.53 vs. 38.86 ± 7.69 (p = 0.005); βSI 4.21 ± 1.03 vs. 3.64 ± 1.02 (p = 0.004); EF 16.13 ± 5.02 vs. 22.76 ± 4.50 (p = 0.0003). Correlation between: EM and clinical attachment level r = 0.58 (p < 0.001), βSI and clinical attachment level r = 0.66 (p < 0.001), EF and clinical attachment level 0.59 (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Parameters of arterial stiffness and EF were worse in patients with SPD and correlated moderately with clinical attachment level. Correlation with compliance and EF was negative.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients referred to the School of Dentistry University of Buenos Aires, were assessed. Demographic characteristics, atherogenic risk factors and concomitant pathologies were recorded. Patients with known cardiovascular pathology were excluded. Using carotid Doppler ultrasound an operator assessed arterial stiffness parameters: compliance, elastic modulus (EM), β stiffness index (βSI) and vascular EF by brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation. The patients were divided into two groups: with and without SPD.
RESULTS: Forty patients were included; 60% were women; 15 were in the SPD group and 25 in the group without SPD. Respective results of the studied variables were: age 56.53 ± 17.58 vs. 51.12 ± 12.97 years (NS); probing depth 2.53 ± 1.30 (95% CI 1.81-3.25) vs. 1.25 ± 0.51 (95% CI 1.31-1.73) p = 0.02; clinical attachment level 4.80 ± 2.00 (95% CI 3.69-5.91) vs. 1.72 ± 0.93 (95% CI 1.33-2.11) p = 0.001; intimal thickness 0.10 ± 0.17 (95% CI 0.095-0.11) vs. 0.82 ± 0.18 (95% CI 0.074-0.98) (NS); EM 48.33 ± 12.53 vs. 38.86 ± 7.69 (p = 0.005); βSI 4.21 ± 1.03 vs. 3.64 ± 1.02 (p = 0.004); EF 16.13 ± 5.02 vs. 22.76 ± 4.50 (p = 0.0003). Correlation between: EM and clinical attachment level r = 0.58 (p < 0.001), βSI and clinical attachment level r = 0.66 (p < 0.001), EF and clinical attachment level 0.59 (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Parameters of arterial stiffness and EF were worse in patients with SPD and correlated moderately with clinical attachment level. Correlation with compliance and EF was negative.