Background
Glycaemic control is a key issue in the care of people with diabetes mellitus (DM). Periodontal disease is the inflammation and destruction of the underlying supporting tissues of the teeth. Some studies have suggested a bidirectional relationship between glycaemic control and periodontal disease. This review updates the previous version published in 2010.

Objectives
The objective is to investigate the effect of periodontal therapy on glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus.

Search methods
We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 31 December 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 31 December 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 31 December 2014), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 31 December 2014), and CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 31 December 2014). ZETOC (1993 to 31 December 2014) and Web of Knowledge (1990 to 31 December 2014) were searched for conference proceedings. Additionally, two periodontology journals were handsearched for completeness, Annals of Periodontology (1996 to 2003) and Periodontology 2000 (1993 to 2003). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

Selection criteria
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with type 1 or type 2 DM (T1DM/T2DM) with a diagnosis of periodontitis. Interventions included periodontal treatments such as mechanical debridement, surgical treatment and antimicrobial therapy. Two broad comparisons were proposed:

1. periodontal therapy versus no active intervention/usual care;
2. periodontal therapy versus alternative periodontal therapy.

Data collection and analysis
For this review update, at least two review authors independently examined the titles and abstracts retrieved by the search, selected the included trials, extracted data from included trials and assessed included trials for risk of bias.

Our primary outcome was blood glucose levels measured as glycated (glycosylated) haemoglobin assay (HbA1c).

Our secondary outcomes included adverse effects, periodontal indices (bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival index (GI), plaque index (PI) and probing pocket depth (PPD)), cost implications and diabetic complications.

Main results
We included 35 studies (including seven from the previous version of the review), which included 2565 participants in total. All studies used a parallel RCT design, and 33 studies (94%) only targeted T2DM patients. There was variation between studies with regards to included age groups (ages 18 to 80), duration of follow-up (3 to 12 months), use of antidiabetic therapy, and included participants' baseline HbA1c levels (from 5.5% to 13.1%).

We assessed 29 studies (83%) as being at high risk of bias, two studies (6%) as being at low risk of bias, and four studies (11%) as unclear. Thirty-four of the studies provided data suitable for analysis under one or both of the two comparisons.

Comparison 1: low quality evidence from 14 studies (1499 participants) comparing periodontal therapy with no active intervention/usual care demonstrated that mean HbA1c was 0.29% lower (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48% to 0.10% lower) 3 to 4 months post-treatment, and 0.02% lower after 6 months (five studies, 826 participants; 95% CI 0.20% lower to 0.16% higher).

Comparison 2: 21 studies (920 participants) compared different periodontal therapies with each other. There was only very low quality evidence for the multiple head-to-head comparisons, the majority of which were unsuitable to be pooled, and provided no clear evidence of a benefit for one periodontal intervention over another. We were able to pool the specific comparison between scaling and root planing (SRP) plus antimicrobial versus SRP and there was no consistent evidence that the addition of antimicrobials to SRP was of any benefit to delivering SRP alone (mean HbA1c 0.00% lower: 12 studies, 450 participants; 95% CI 0.22% lower to 0.22% higher) at 3-4 months post-treatment, or after 6 months (mean HbA1c 0.04% lower: five studies, 206 patients; 95% CI 0.41% lower to 0.32% higher).

Less than half of the studies measured adverse effects. The evidence was insufficient to conclude whether any of the treatments were associated with harm. No other patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were measured by the included studies, and neither were cost implications or diabetic complications.

Studies showed varying degrees of success with regards to achieving periodontal health, with some showing high levels of residual inflammation following treatment. Statistically significant improvements were shown for all periodontal indices (BOP, CAL, GI, PI and PPD) at 3-4 and 6 months in comparison 1; however, this was less clear for individual comparisons within the broad category of comparison 2.

Authors' conclusions
There is low quality evidence that the treatment of periodontal disease by SRP does improve glycaemic control in people with diabetes, with a mean percentage reduction in HbA1c of 0.29% at 3-4 months; however, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that this is maintained after 4 months.

There was no evidence to support that one periodontal therapy was more effective than another in improving glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus.

In clinical practice, ongoing professional periodontal treatment will be required to maintain clinical improvements beyond 6 months. Further research is required to determine whether adjunctive drug therapies should be used with periodontal treatment. Future RCTs should evaluate this, provide longer follow-up periods, and consider the inclusion of a third 'no treatment' control arm.

Larger, well conducted and clearly reported studies are needed in order to understand the potential of periodontal treatment to improve glycaemic control among people with diabetes mellitus. In addition, it will be important in future studies that the intervention is effective in reducing periodontal inflammation and maintaining it at lowered levels throughout the period of observation.

/pdf/treatment-of-periodontal-disease-for-glycaemic-control-in-1du1p1q3tn.pdf

Treatment of periodontal disease for glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus.

Current concepts in the management of periodontitis

Periodontal disease is a high prevalent disease. In the United States 47.2% of adults ≥ 30 years old have been diagnosed with some type of periodontitis. Longitudinal studies have demonstrated a two-way relationship between diabetes and periodontitis, with more severe periodontal tissue destruction in diabetic patients and poorer glycemic control in diabetic subjects with periodontal disease. Periodontal treatment can be successful in diabetic patients. Short term effects of periodontal treatment are similar in diabetic patients and healthy population but, more recurrence of periodontal disease can be expected in no well controlled diabetic individuals. However, effects of periodontitis and its treatment on diabetes metabolic control are not clearly defined and results of the studies remain controversial.

Relationship between diabetes and periodontal infection.

β-type titanium (Ti) alloys have attracted a lot of attention as novel biomedical materials in the past decades due to their low elastic moduli and good biocompatibility. This article provides a broad and extensive review of β-type Ti alloys in terms of alloy design, preparation methods, mechanical properties, corrosion behavior, and biocompatibility. After briefly introducing the development of Ti and Ti alloys for biomedical applications, this article reviews the design of β-type Ti alloys from the perspective of the molybdenum equivalency (Moeq) method and DV-Xα molecular orbital method. Based on these methods, a considerable number of β-type Ti alloys are developed. Although β-type Ti alloys have lower elastic moduli compared with other types of Ti alloys, they still possess higher elastic moduli than human bones. Therefore, porous β-type Ti alloys with declined elastic modulus have been developed by some preparation methods, such as powder metallurgy, additive manufacture and so on. As reviewed, β-type Ti alloys have comparable or even better mechanical properties, corrosion behavior, and biocompatibility compared with other types of Ti alloys. Hence, β-type Ti alloys are the more suitable materials used as implant materials. However, there are still some problems with β-type Ti alloys, such as biological inertness. As such, summarizing the findings from the current literature, suggestions forβ-type Ti alloys with bioactive coatings are proposed for the future development.

/pdf/recent-development-in-beta-titanium-alloys-for-biomedical-2hn9hhw8n1.pdf

Recent Development in Beta Titanium Alloys for Biomedical Applications

© 2019 The Cochrane Collaboration. Background: Macrolide antibiotics (macrolides) are among the most commonly prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are used for a wide range of infections. However, macrolides also expose people to the risk of adverse events. The current understanding of adverse events is mostly derived from observational studies, which are subject to bias because it is hard to distinguish events caused by antibiotics from events caused by the diseases being treated. Because adverse events are treatment-specific, rather than disease-specific, it is possible to increase the number of adverse events available for analysis by combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the same treatment across different diseases. Objectives: To quantify the incidences of reported adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics compared to placebo for any indication. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register (2018, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid, from 1946 to 8 May 2018); Embase (from 2010 to 8 May 2018); CINAHL (from 1981 to 8 May 2018); LILACS (from 1982 to 8 May 2018); and Web of Science (from 1955 to 8 May 2018). We searched clinical trial registries for current and completed trials (9 May 2018) and checked the reference lists of included studies and of previous Cochrane Reviews on macrolides. Selection criteria: We included RCTs that compared a macrolide antibiotic to placebo for any indication. We included trials using any of the four most commonly used macrolide antibiotics: azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, or roxithromycin. Macrolides could be administered by any route. Concomitant medications were permitted provided they were equally available to both treatment and comparison groups. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included studies and the quality of evidence for each outcome of interest. We analysed specific adverse events, deaths, and subsequent carriage of macrolide-resistant bacteria separately. The study participant was the unit of analysis for each adverse event. Any specific adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of any group were reported. We undertook a meta-analysis when three or more included studies reported a specific adverse event. Main results: We included 183 studies with a total of 252,886 participants (range 40 to 190,238). The indications for macrolide antibiotics varied greatly, with most studies using macrolides for the treatment or prevention of either acute respiratory tract infections, cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, gastrointestinal conditions, or urogynaecological problems. Most trials were conducted in secondary care settings. Azithromycin and erythromycin were more commonly studied than clarithromycin and roxithromycin. Most studies (89%) reported some adverse events or at least stated that no adverse events were observed. Gastrointestinal adverse events were the most commonly reported type of adverse event. Compared to placebo, macrolides caused more diarrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.16; low-quality evidence); more abdominal pain (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.26; low-quality evidence); and more nausea (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.90; moderate-quality evidence). Vomiting (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.56; moderate-quality evidence) and gastrointestinal disorders not otherwise specified (NOS) (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.00; moderate-quality evidence) were also reported more often in participants taking macrolides compared to placebo. The number of additional people (absolute difference in risk) who experienced adverse events from macrolides was: gastrointestinal disorders NOS 85/1000; diarrhoea 72/1000; abdominal pain 62/1000; nausea 47/1000; and vomiting 23/1000. The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) ranged from 12 (95% CI 8 to 23) for gastrointestinal disorders NOS to 17 (9 to 47) for abdominal pain; 19 (12 to 33) for diarrhoea; 19 (13 to 30) for nausea; and 45 (22 to 295) for vomiting. There was no clear consistent difference in gastrointestinal adverse events between different types of macrolides or route of administration. Taste disturbances were reported more often by participants taking macrolide antibiotics, although there were wide confidence intervals and moderate heterogeneity (OR 4.95, 95% CI 1.64 to 14.93; I2 = 46%; low-quality evidence). Compared with participants taking placebo, those taking macrolides experienced hearing loss more often, however only four studies reported this outcome (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). We did not find any evidence that macrolides caused more cardiac disorders (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; very low-quality evidence); hepatobiliary disorders (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.09; very low-quality evidence); or changes in liver enzymes (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.37; very low-quality evidence) compared to placebo. We did not find any evidence that appetite loss, dizziness, headache, respiratory symptoms, blood infections, skin and soft tissue infections, itching, or rashes were reported more often by participants treated with macrolides compared to placebo. Macrolides caused less cough (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo, probably because these are not adverse events, but rather characteristics of the indications for the antibiotics. Less fever (OR 0.73, 95% 0.54 to 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) was also reported by participants taking macrolides compared to placebo, although these findings were non-significant. There was no increase in mortality in participants taking macrolides compared with placebo (OR 0.96, 95% 0.87 to 1.06; I2 = 11%; low-quality evidence). Only 24 studies (13%) provided useful data on macrolide-resistant bacteria. Macrolide-resistant bacteria were more commonly identified among participants immediately after exposure to the antibiotic. However, differences in resistance thereafter were inconsistent. Pharmaceutical companies supplied the trial medication or funding, or both, for 91 trials. Authors' conclusions: The macrolides as a group clearly increased rates of gastrointestinal adverse events. Most trials made at least some statement about adverse events, such as "none were observed". However, few trials clearly listed adverse events as outcomes, reported on the methods used for eliciting adverse events, or even detailed the numbers of people who experienced adverse events in both the intervention and placebo group. This was especially true for the adverse event of bacterial resistance.

/pdf/adverse-events-in-people-taking-macrolide-antibiotics-versus-apvsdqqzz4.pdf

Adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics versus placebo for any indication.

Background and Objective

Periodontitis may alter the systemic condition in patients with diabetes and hence interfere with glycemic control. The objective of this study was to determine the quantifiable changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) after periodontal non-surgical therapy plus azithromycin in a mixed population of patients with poorly controlled diabetes.



Materials and Methods

One hundred and five patients were randomized to receive non-surgical therapy plus azythromycin (AZ-Sca =33), non-surgical therapy plus placebo (PB-Sca = 37) and supragingival prophylaxis plus azithromycin (AZ-Pro = 35). Glycated hemoglobin, glycemia and periodontal parameters were measured at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 mo after treatment.



Results

Periodontal parameters were improved in the AZ-Sca and PB-Sca groups as compared to the AZ-Pro group. A greater reduction in probing depth was observed in the AZ-Sca as compared to the PB-Sca group. Improvement in clinical attachment level was similar between AZ-Sca and PB-Sca groups. A reduction from 8.0% to 7.2% (∆0.8%; p < 0.05) in HbA1C was observed in the AZ-Sca at 9 mo as compared to the PB-Sca group in which the reduction was from 7.9% to 7.6% (∆0.3%). There was no decrease in HbA1C in the AZ-Pro group over time. Mean glycemia values decreased from 195 mg/dL to 159.2 mg/dL (∆35.8 mg/dL; p < 0.05) in the AZ-Sca group whereas a decrease from 194 mg/dL to 174.8 mg/dL (∆19.2 mg/dL) in the PB-Sca group at 9 mo was observed. There were no differences between the AZ-Sca and PB-Sca groups for glycemic parameters. No improvement in glycemic values in the AZ-Pro group was observed.



Conclusions

A modest improvement in glycemic control was detected with a trend towards the use of non-surgical therapy plus AZ as compared to the placebo.

Effects of periodontal non-surgical therapy plus azithromycin on glycemic control in patients with diabetes: a randomized clinical trial.

Background: Periodontal disease has been associated with diabetes, but there is still controversy on the relationship between periodontal clinical parameters and glycemic control. The purpose of this study is to assess the relationship between blood glucose levels and clinical parameters of periodontal disease in individuals with diabetes. Methods: A total of 65 individuals with diabetes and 81 individuals without diabetes were included in the study. A full-mouth periodontal examination and preprandial fasting glycemia values were recorded for each individual. Glycosylated hemoglobin was only measured in patients with diabetes. A comparative analysis between groups (Mann-Whitney U test) and a correlation analysis between glycemia and periodontal parameters were performed (Spearman test). Results: Patients without diabetes presented more teeth than individuals with diabetes (P <0.05). Patients with diabetes with periodontitis displayed loss of periodontal clinical attachment compared to patients without diabetes, but the highest value was observed in patients with periodontitis that reported a smoking habit. Furthermore, patients with diabetes with periodontitis presented higher glycemia and glycated hemoglobin values in contrast to patients with gingivitis. Patients with diabetes with hyperglycemia had a higher risk to develop periodontitis (odds ratio = 2.24; 95% confidence interval = 1.02 to 4.93). A positive correlation was observed between glycemia and clinical attachment loss (AL), whereas a negative correlation between glycemia and the number of teeth present was found (P <0.05). Conclusions: Tooth and periodontal AL were increased by hyperglycemia in individuals with diabetes. This study contributes additional evidence that diabetes could aggravate periodontal disease and affect the systemic health of individuals. J Periodontol 2012;83:1245-1250.

Tooth and Periodontal Clinical Attachment Loss Are Associated With Hyperglycemia in Patients With Diabetes

Orthorhombic martensite formation upon aging in a Ti-30Nb-4Sn alloy

From 1965 to the present, Colombia has been confronted by the insurgency of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The threat reached a new level in 1996 with the advent of mobile warfare, whereby large units sought to neutralize the military in an effort to seize power and institute a Marxist-Leninist regime. Unlike Vietnam, what followed was a regaining of the strategic initiative by the government and a decimation of the insurgent threat. This was accomplished with US assistance but from first to last was driven by Colombian leadership and strategy. The strategy which led to this signal change, ‘Democratic Security’, unfolded under the leadership of President Alvaro Uribe. It was a civil–military partnership, which sought to expand the writ of Colombian democracy to all elements of society. Securing the population provided the shield behind which economic, social, and political life could occur as driven by the will of the people. It was the agreement upon legitimacy as the strategic goal a...

Colombia: Changing strategy amidst the struggle

La Marchitez letal (ML) es una de las principales enfermedades de la palma de aceite en Colombia. Sus primeros registros en la Zona Oriental se dieron en 1994 en la subregion del Bajo Upia donde ha causado la muerte de mas de 106.000 palmas. Por sus sintomas es parecida a uno de los casos de marchitez registrados en la decada entre 1965 y 1975 cuando fueron afectadas alrededor de 288.000 palmas en la plantacion Oleaginosas Risaralda. Estudios previos han arrojado evidencias de la participacion de un insecto en el proceso de diseminacion del agente responsable de la enfermedad, que por sus habitos alimenticios y relacion con la vegetacion circundante, esta desempenando un papel importante en el desarrollo de la ML. La atencion se centro en el Cixiidae Myndus crudus van Duzee, el cual tiene antecedentes como vector del patogeno causante de la enfermedad en Oleaginosas Risaralda, asi como del amarillamiento letal del cocotero (CLV). En este trabajo se realizaron pruebas de transmision con adultos de M. crudus provenientes de las colonias desarrolladas con este fin, exponiendo algunos de ellos a alimentacion en palmas enfermas y otros a palmas sanas para ser usados como control.

Carlos Andrés Ospina

Papers

Effects of periodontal non-surgical therapy plus azithromycin on glycemic control in patients with diabetes: a randomized clinical trial.

Tooth and Periodontal Clinical Attachment Loss Are Associated With Hyperglycemia in Patients With Diabetes

Orthorhombic martensite formation upon aging in a Ti-30Nb-4Sn alloy

Colombia: Changing strategy amidst the struggle

Myndus crudus : vector del agente causante de la marchitez letal en palma de aceite en Colombia