Oral diseases · 2017
Gingival crevicular fluid levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 in patients with aggressive periodontitis.
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.
Gunpinar S, Alptekin N O, Dundar N
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP)-1 in aggressive periodontitis (AgP) and whether GCF MCP-1 levels differ among localized (L) AgP and generalized (G) AgP.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 160 subjects including 80 AgP and 80 age- and gender-matched periodontally healthy (H) controls were recruited in this cross-sectional study (NCT02927704). GCF samples were collected from 160 patients including 50 LAgP, 30 GAgP, and 80 H. Volume of GCF was measured by Periotron 8000® , and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to assess MCP-1 levels.
RESULTS: Compared to H controls, all clinical parameters and total amounts (pg 30 s-1 ) of MCP-1 were significantly higher in subjects with LAgP and GAgP (P < 0.05). Although concentrations of GCF MCP-1 did not differ between LAgP and GAgP (P > 0.05), total amounts of MCP-1 were higher in GAgP than LAgP (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that the total amount of MCP-1 level in GCF may be a potential determinant in AgP subjects. Increased MCP-1 levels in line with the degree of periodontal destruction in GAgP patients reveal that MCP-1 can be used to understand the disease pathogenesis of LAgP and GAgP.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 160 subjects including 80 AgP and 80 age- and gender-matched periodontally healthy (H) controls were recruited in this cross-sectional study (NCT02927704). GCF samples were collected from 160 patients including 50 LAgP, 30 GAgP, and 80 H. Volume of GCF was measured by Periotron 8000® , and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to assess MCP-1 levels.
RESULTS: Compared to H controls, all clinical parameters and total amounts (pg 30 s-1 ) of MCP-1 were significantly higher in subjects with LAgP and GAgP (P < 0.05). Although concentrations of GCF MCP-1 did not differ between LAgP and GAgP (P > 0.05), total amounts of MCP-1 were higher in GAgP than LAgP (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that the total amount of MCP-1 level in GCF may be a potential determinant in AgP subjects. Increased MCP-1 levels in line with the degree of periodontal destruction in GAgP patients reveal that MCP-1 can be used to understand the disease pathogenesis of LAgP and GAgP.