Salivary leukocyte esterase activity by SillHa is a risk indicator of periodontal disease.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that diagnostic salivary tests measuring inflammatory biomarkers are being developed to assess inflammatory status for early detection, prevention, and progression of periodontal disease. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate and identify the salivary biomarker that can predict the inflammatory status of periodontal disease. METHODS: A total of 36 patients (28 women and 8 men) with an average age of 57 years were investigated. Unstimulated saliva was collected from the recruited subjects and analyzed using SillHa, a saliva-testing device that measures bacteria count, saliva buffer capacity, acidity, leukocyte esterase, protein, and ammonia. Periodontal parameters were then obtained by clinical examination and initial periodontal therapy was performed. Data obtained with SillHa were compared with clinical periodontal parameters at baseline, re-examination (three months from baseline), and final examination (six months from re-examination). RESULTS: Leukocyte esterase activity in saliva measured by SillHa; BOP and PCR measured by clinical examination showed a significant difference between baseline and final examination and between re-examination and final examination. Patients in the lower median group (group 1) had a significant difference in leukocyte esterase activity between baseline and final examination and re-examination and final examination. In addition, patients in Group 1 had significantly lower BOP between baseline and final examination. While patients in the higher median group (group 2) showed a modest decrease in leukocyte esterase activity, which was significant only between baseline and final examination, no significant changes were observed concerning BOP. Furthermore, the associated systemic disease was observed in 30% and 81.2% of group 1 and 2 patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that leukocyte esterase activity in saliva measured by SillHa could serve as a reliable diagnostic marker for monitoring inflammatory status in periodontal disease.

A case series describing the risk of periodontal disease in Marfan syndrome patients harboring a possible aortic aneurysm or dissection.

BACKGROUND: Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a systemic disorder of connective tissues caused by insufficient elastic fiber formation that leads to structural weakness and results in various tissue disorders, including cardiovascular and periodontal disease. Notably however, the risk of periodontal disease in MFS patients affected by an aortic aneurysm or dissection has not yet been clarified. METHODS: We investigated the periodontal condition in the following three groups: MFS patients diagnosed with an aortic aneurysm or dissection with a planned aortic surgery (MFS surgery), MFS patients who had already undergone aortic surgery (MFS post-surgery) and healthy control patients (Healthy). The periodontal condition of all of these patients was evaluated at their first visit, reassessed again at two-month after the first visit, and evaluated again at a six-month follow-up after the reassessment. RESULTS: A total of 14 participants, 3 MFS surgery patients, 4 MFS post-surgery patients and 7 healthy control volunteers were examined. Saliva examinations revealed no significant differences between any of the groups at the first visit, reassessment, or follow-up. Interestingly, the MFS surgery cases showed a higher BOP and PISA at the first visit and follow-up compared with the other groups. In contrast, the MFS surgery patients showed an improvement in their LVDd and EF values, both markers of cardiac function, at the reassessment and follow-up compared with the first visit. CONCLUSIONS: MFS associated with an aortic aneurysm or dissection leads to a higher risk of periodontal disease, indicating the need for more frequent oral hygiene maintenance in these patients. In addition, MFS patients who undergo frequent professional cleaning of their teeth show a lower onset of cardiovascular disease, suggesting that professional oral hygiene in these cases contributes to a healthier condition.

Comparison of oral metabolome profiles of stimulated saliva, unstimulated saliva, and mouth-rinsed water.

Saliva includes a substantial amount of biological information, which has enabled us to understand the relationship between oral metabolites and various oral and systemic disorders. However, collecting saliva using a controlled protocol is time-consuming, making saliva an unsuitable analyte in large cohort studies. Mouth-rinsed water (MW), the water used to rinse the mouth, can be collected easily in less time with less difference between subjects than saliva and could be used as an alternative in oral metabolome analyses. In this study, we investigated the potential of MW collection as an efficient alternative to saliva sample collection for oral metabolome profiling. MW, stimulated saliva, and unstimulated saliva were collected from 10 systemically healthy participants. The samples were subjected to metabolome analysis using capillary electrophoresis time-of-flight mass spectrometry, and the types and amounts of metabolites in the samples were compared. Qualitatively, MW contained the same metabolites as unstimulated and stimulated saliva. While the quantity of the metabolites did not drastically change between the sampling methods, all three reflected individual differences, and the features of MW were the same as those of the unstimulated saliva. Overall, these results suggest that MW may be an appropriate alternative to saliva in oral metabolome profile analysis.

Comparison of oral microbiome profiles in stimulated and unstimulated saliva, tongue, and mouth-rinsed water.

Epidemiological studies using saliva have revealed relationships between the oral microbiome and many oral and systemic diseases. However, when collecting from a large number of participants such as a large-scale cohort study, the time it takes to collect saliva can be a problem. Mouth-rinsed water, which is water that has been used to rinse the oral cavity, can be used as an alternative method for collecting saliva for oral microbiome analysis because it can be collected in a shorter time than saliva. The purpose of this study was to verify whether mouth-rinsed water is a suitable saliva substitute for analyzing the oral microbiome. We collected samples of mouth-rinsed water, stimulated saliva, unstimulated saliva, and tongue coating from 10 systemic healthy participants, and compared the microbial diversity and composition of the samples using next-generation sequencing of 16S rRNA-encoding genes. The results showed that the microbial diversity of mouth-rinsed water was similar to that of unstimulated and stimulated saliva, and significantly higher than that of tongue-coating samples. The microbial composition at the species level of mouth-rinsed water also showed a very high correlation with the composition of unstimulated and stimulated saliva. These results suggest that the mouth-rinsed water is a suitable collection method instead of saliva for oral microbiome analysis.