RESUMO
Periodontal and peri-implant diseases result from a chronic inflammatory response to dysbiotic microbial communities and are characterized by inflammation in the soft tissue and the ensuing progressive destruction of supporting bone, resulting in tooth or implant loss. These diseases' high prevalence, multifactorial etiology, extensive treatment costs, and significant detriment to patients' quality-of-life underscore their status as a critical public health burden. This review delineates the economic and sociocultural ramifications of periodontal and peri-implant diseases on patient welfare and healthcare economics. We delve into the implications of diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, and managing destructive tissue consequences, contrasting these aspects with healthy patients.
RESUMO
AIM: To determine the structural and gene expression features of different intra-oral soft tissue donor sites (i.e., anterior palate, posterior palate, maxillary tuberosity and retromolar pad). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized mucosal tissue punch biopsies were collected from at least one donor site per subject. Histological processing was performed to determine tissue morphometry and quantify collagen composition. Site-specific gene distribution was mapped using targeted gene expression analysis and validated using real time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). RESULTS: A total of 50 samples from 37 subjects were harvested. Epithelial thickness did not differ between sites. However, lamina propria was thicker in the maxillary tuberosity (2.55 ± 0.92 mm) and retromolar pad (1.98 ± 0.71 mm) than in the lateral palate. Type I collagen was the predominant structural protein in the lamina propria (75.06%-80.21%). Genes involving collagen maturation and extracellular matrix regulation were highly expressed in the maxillary tuberosity and retromolar pad, while lipogenesis-associated genes were markedly expressed in the lateral palate. The retromolar pad showed the most distinct gene expression profile, and the anterior and posterior palate displayed similar transcription profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue samples harvested from the anterior and posterior palate differed morphologically from those from the maxillary tuberosity and retromolar pad. Each intra-oral site showed a unique gene expression profile, which might impact their biological behaviour and outcomes of soft tissue augmentation procedures.