Localization and expression profiles of gingival monocyte chemoattractant protein-1-induced protein-1 (MCPIP-1) and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma translocation protein 1 (MALT-1).

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to localize monocyte chemoattractant protein-1-induced protein-1 (MCPIP-1) and its suppressor mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma translocation protein 1 (MALT-1) in gingival tissues and to profile their protein expression levels in relation to the clinical inflammation, Porphyromonas gingivalis colonization, and interleukin (IL)-8 levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study samples were collected from two independent study populations: (1) Gingival tissues were collected from eight periodontally healthy individuals and eight periodontitis patients to localize MCPIP-1 and MALT-1 immunohistochemically, and (2) forty-one gingival tissue samples with marginal, mild, or moderate to severe inflammation were collected from 20 periodontitis patients to determine MCPIP-1 and MALT-1 levels using immunoblots, P. gingivalis levels with qPCR, P. gingivalis gingipain activities with fluorogenic substrates, and IL-8 levels with multiplex technique. RESULTS: MCPIP-1 was detectable in the epithelium and in connective tissue, being especially prominent around the blood vessel walls in healthy periodontal tissues. MALT-1 was observed at all layers of gingival epithelium and especially around the accumulated inflammatory cells in connective tissue. No difference in gingival tissue MCPIP-1 and MALT-1 levels was observed in relation to the severity of gingival inflammation. MALT-1 levels were elevated (p = 0.023) with the increase in tissue P. gingivalis levels, and there was an association between MALT-1 and IL-8 levels (ß = 0.054, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Interactions of MALT-1 levels with gingival tissue P. gingivalis counts and IL-8 levels suggest that activation of MALT-1 can take part in P. gingivalis-regulated host immune responses. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Pharmacological targeting the crosstalk between immune response and MCPIP-1/MALT-1 may have benefits in periodontal treatment.

Advances in periodontal biomarkers.

Due to technologic advancements, periodontology has witnessed a boost in biomarker research over the past three decades. Indeed, with the aid of omics, our understanding of the healthy periodontium, pathogenesis of periodontal diseases, and healing after periodontal treatment has improved significantly. Yet, the traditional methods, periodontal probing and radiographies, remain the most common methods to diagnose periodontal disease and monitor treatment. Although these approaches can produce reliable diagnostic outcomes, they generally detect disease only after significant tissue degradation thus making treatment outcome highly uncertain. Accordingly, laboratories worldwide have collaborated with clinicians to design accurate, rapid and cost-effective biomarkers for periodontal disease diagnosis. Despite these efforts, biomarkers that can be widely used in early disease diagnosis and for treatment outcome prediction are far from daily use. The aim of this chapter is to give a general overview on periodontal health and diseases, and review recent advancements in periodontal biomarker research. A second aim will discuss the strengths and limitations of translating periodontal biomarker research to clinical practice. Genetic biomarkers of periodontitis are not discussed as the available confirmatory data is scarce.

Potential barriers to the rational antibiotic use in dental and periodontal practice: A questionnaire-based online survey.

BACKGROUND: Dentists, through inappropriate antibiotic prescription, may contribute to the global problem of antibiotic resistance (AR). OBJECTIVES: Understanding dentists' antibiotic prescription patterns, source of knowledge, and the driving forces behind their prescription practices may be crucial for the effective implementation of the rational use of antibiotics (RUA) in dentistry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Active members of the Turkish Dental Association were invited to participate in an electronic survey comprising questions focusing on their role, knowledge and perceptions regarding RUA, the perceived barriers to adapting RUA in daily dental work, and the actual antibiotic prescription practices. The potential impact of age, gender, professional experience, and the mode of dental practice was also evaluated. Dentists' prescription practices for periodontal disease/conditions were evaluated as well. RESULTS: Based on 1,005 valid responses, there was consensus on the necessity of RUA (99.1%); however, its implementation was low. The main barriers were dentists' own safety concerns (74.4%), strong patients' demands (42.2%) and the fact that prescribing antibiotics became a professional habit (35.8%). Different educational background resulted in clear variances in everyday prescription practices. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of RUA was not sufficient and the perceived barriers had an impact on daily prescribing habits. Support for dental professionals through the efficient dissemination of evidencebased clinical guidelines and decision-making aids is likely to require additional help from professional organizations in order to actively combat AR.