PubMed · 2015 · 18 citations · 0 references
DentistryPeriodonticsPeriodontologyPeriodontal MedicinePeriodontal Research MethodsPeriodontal TherapyAdolescent Oral HealthDiabetes MellitusPeriodontal DiseasePeriodontal ExaminationPeriodontal HealthPeriodontal Status EvaluationClinical Attachment Level AssessmentClinical Periodontal AssessmentControl Group DesignGingival Bleeding AssessmentInterproximal Clinical Attachment LossPeriodontal Phenotype AssessmentPeriodontal Status ComparisonPlaque Quantification
AIM: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of type 1 diabetes and the possible role of metabolic control on the periodontal status of diabetic adolescents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of 40 patients each were examined: diabetic subjects with a good metabolic control (well controlled WC) (glycated haemoglobin HbA1c ≤ 7%) (20 males and 20 females; mean age: 14.1 ± 1.5 years); diabetic subjects with poor metabolic control (poorly controlled PC) (glycated haemoglobin HbA1c> 7%) (20 males and 20 females; mean age: 14.5 ± 1.3 years); and patients in good general health, which constituted the control group (20 males and 20 females; mean age: 14.1 ± 1.2 years). For each subject, a periodontal evaluation was performed and the following parameters were assessed: Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), Bleeding on probing (BOP), Probing Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL). Chi-square was used to compare categorical variables. Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA by ranks was used to compare the quantitative variables (GBI, PD) among the 3 groups. Post-hoc comparison between pairs of groups was assessed by Wilcoxon's rank sum test, with a downward adjustment of the alpha level to compensate for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The levels of PI in WC subjects (1.9 ± 0.8) and in PC subjects (2.1 ± 0.6) were significantly higher compared to healthy subjects in the control group (0.8 ± 0.7) (p <0.0001). Similarly, the GI in both PC (1.9 ± 0.8) and WC subjetcs (1.7 ± 0.9) was significantly higher (p <0.05) compared to controls (0.9 ± 0.8). GBI in the PC (60.2 ± 23.6%) and the WC (57.4 ± 22.5%) groups was significantly higher compared to healthy subjects (35.9 ± 18.7%) (p <0.05). The PD parameter was found significantly higher (p <0.05) in the PC group (26.7 ± 12.6) and WC group (23.5 ± 11.3%) compared with controls (8.3 ± 6.2%). Regarding the CAL, no significant differences were found between the groups (p> 0.05). In addition, the comparisons between groups PC and WC were not statistically significant (p> 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents affected with type 1 diabetes show a higher level of bacterial plaque, gingival inflammation with bleeding on probing and probing depth, compared to healthy subjects. There were no significant changes with regard to the accumulation of plaque and periodontal status among diabetic patients both with good control and with poor metabolic control.