Assessment of viable periodontal pathogens by reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Molecular biological methods for the detection of periodontitis-associated bacteria based on DNA amplification have many advantages over classical culture techniques. However, when it comes to assessing immediate therapeutic success, e.g. reduction of viable bacteria, DNA-based polymerase chain reaction is unsuitable because it does not distinguish between live and dead bacteria. Our objective was to establish a simple RNA-based method that is easily set up and allows reliable assessment of the live bacterial load. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We compared conventional quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), propidium monoazide-qPCR and reverse transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR) for the detection of periodontal pathogens after antibiotic treatment in vitro. Applicability was tested using clinical samples of subgingival plaque obtained from patients at different treatment stages. RESULTS: The bacterial load was remarkably stable over prolonged periods when assessed by conventional qPCR, while both propidium monoazide intercalation as well as cDNA quantitation showed a decline according to decreasing numbers of viable bacteria after antibiotic treatment. Clinical samples of subgingival plaque were directly subjected to DNase I treatment and RT without previous extraction or purification steps. While the results of the DNA- and RNA-based methods are comparable in untreated patients, the classical qPCR frequently detected substantial bacterial load in treated patients where RT-qPCR no longer indicates the presence of those pathogens. The disagreement rates ranged between 4 and 20% in first visit patients and 8-50% in the group of currently treated patients. CONCLUSION: We propose to use RNA-based detection methods to verify the successful eradication of periodontal pathogens.

Smoking influences salivary histamine levels in periodontal disease.

OBJECTIVES: Histamine, a potent vasoactive amine, is increased in saliva of periodontitis patients. The present study aimed to further investigate the diagnostic potential of histamine for periodontal disease and assessed smoking, a major risk factor of periodontitis, as a possible influencing factor. METHODS: Salivary and serum samples of 106 participants (60 periodontitis patients, 46 controls) were collected. Salivary histamine was determined by a commercially available ELISA kit, and serum C-reactive protein was measured by a routine laboratory test. Cigarettes per day and packyears were assessed as smoking exposure parameters. RESULTS: Statistically significantly increased levels of salivary histamine and serum C-reactive protein were detected between the patient and control group (P = 0.022 and P = 0.001). Salivary histamine levels were significantly higher in smoking compared with non-smoking patients (P < 0.001), and salivary histamine as well as serum C-reactive protein correlated significantly positively with smoking exposure parameters (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking, an established and common risk factor of periodontitis, was assessed as a possible influencing factor for salivary histamine. Most interestingly, salivary histamine differed highly significantly between smoking and non-smoking periodontitis patients. Our results suggest a possible involvement of histamine in tobacco-exacerbated periodontal disease, but do not suggest salivary histamine as a reliable diagnostic marker for periodontitis.