Classification systems are necessary in order to provide a framework in which to scientifically study the etiology, pathogenesis, and treatment of diseases in an orderly fashion. In addition, such systems give clinicians a way to organize the health care needs of their patients. The last time scientists and clinicians in the field of periodontology and related areas agreed upon a classi- fication system for periodontal diseases was in 1989 at the World Workshop in Clinical Periodontics.1 Subsequently, a simpler classification was agreed upon at the 1st European Workshop in Periodontology.2 These classification systems have been widely used by clinicians and research scientists throughout the world. Unfortunately, the 1989 classification had many shortcomings including: 1) considerable overlap in disease categories, 2) absence of a gingival disease component, 3) inappropriate emphasis on age of onset of disease and rates of progression, and 4) inadequate or unclear classification criteria. The 1993 Europea...

/pdf/development-of-a-classification-system-for-periodontal-3vu8csrg57.pdf

Development of a Classification System for Periodontal Diseases and Conditions

A classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions is necessary for clinicians to properly diagnose and treat patients as well as for scientists to investigate etiology, pathogenesis, natural history, and treatment of the diseases and conditions. This paper summarizes the proceedings of the World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. The workshop was co-sponsored by the American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) and the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) and included expert participants from all over the world. Planning for the conference, which was held in Chicago on November 9 to 11, 2017, began in early 2015. An organizing committee from the AAP and EFP commissioned 19 review papers and four consensus reports covering relevant areas in periodontology and implant dentistry. The authors were charged with updating the 1999 classification of periodontal diseases and conditions and developing a similar scheme for peri-implant diseases and conditions. Reviewers and workgroups were also asked to establish pertinent case definitions and to provide diagnostic criteria to aid clinicians in the use of the new classification. All findings and recommendations of the workshop were agreed to by consensus. This introductory paper presents an overview for the new classification of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions, along with a condensed scheme for each of four workgroup sections, but readers are directed to the pertinent consensus reports and review papers for a thorough discussion of the rationale, criteria, and interpretation of the proposed classification. Changes to the 1999 classification are highlighted and discussed. Although the intent of the workshop was to base classification on the strongest available scientific evidence, lower level evidence and expert opinion were inevitably used whenever sufficient research data were unavailable. The scope of this workshop was to align and update the classification scheme to the current understanding of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions. This introductory overview presents the schematic tables for the new classification of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions and briefly highlights changes made to the 1999 classification. It cannot present the wealth of information included in the reviews, case definition papers, and consensus reports that has guided the development of the new classification, and reference to the consensus and case definition papers is necessary to provide a thorough understanding of its use for either case management or scientific investigation. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the reader use this overview as an introduction to these subjects. Accessing this publication online will allow the reader to use the links in this overview and the tables to view the source papers (Table 1).

/pdf/a-new-classification-scheme-for-periodontal-and-peri-implant-160pyrsfm7.pdf

A new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions - Introduction and key changes from the 1999 classification.

Background: Most studies examining the commensal human oral microbiome are focused on disease or are limited in methodology. In order to diagnose and treat diseases at an early and reversible stage an indepth definition of health is indispensible. The aim of this study therefore was to define the healthy oral microbiome using recent advances in sequencing technology (454 pyrosequencing). Results: We sampled and sequenced microbiomes from several intraoral niches (dental surfaces, cheek, hard palate, tongue and saliva) in three healthy individuals. Within an individual oral cavity, we found over 3600 unique sequences, over 500 different OTUs or "species-level" phylotypes (sequences that clustered at 3% genetic difference) and 88 - 104 higher taxa (genus or more inclusive taxon). The predominant taxa belonged to Firmicutes (genus Streptococcus, family Veillonellaceae, genus Granulicatella), Proteobacteria (genus Neisseria, Haemophilus), Actinobacteria (genus Corynebacterium, Rothia, Actinomyces), Bacteroidetes (genus Prevotella, Capnocytophaga, Porphyromonas) and Fusobacteria (genus Fusobacterium). Each individual sample harboured on average 266 "species-level" phylotypes (SD 67; range 123 - 326) with cheek samples being the least diverse and the dental samples from approximal surfaces showing the highest diversity. Principal component analysis discriminated the profiles of the samples originating from shedding surfaces (mucosa of tongue, cheek and palate) from the samples that were obtained from solid surfaces (teeth). There was a large overlap in the higher taxa, "species-level" phylotypes and unique sequences among the three microbiomes: 84% of the higher taxa, 75% of the OTUs and 65% of the unique sequences were present in at least two of the three microbiomes. The three individuals shared 1660 of 6315 unique sequences. These 1660 sequences (the "core microbiome") contributed 66% of the reads. The overlapping OTUs contributed to 94% of the reads, while nearly all reads (99.8%) belonged to the shared higher taxa. Conclusions: We obtained the first insight into the diversity and uniqueness of individual oral microbiomes at a resolution of next-generation sequencing. We showed that a major proportion of bacterial sequences of unrelated healthy individuals is identical, supporting the concept of a core microbiome at health.

/pdf/defining-the-healthy-core-microbiome-of-oral-microbial-2t1ot01v7r.pdf

Defining the healthy "core microbiome" of oral microbial communities

Background Infectious diseases may rival cancer, heart disease, and chronic lung disease as sources of morbidity and mortality from smoking. We reviewed mechanisms by which smoking increases the risk of infection and the epidemiology of smoking-related infection, and delineated implications of this increased risk of infection among cigarette smokers. Methods The MEDLINE database was searched for articles on the mechanisms and epidemiology of smoking-related infectious diseases. English-language articles and selected cross-references were included. Results Mechanisms by which smoking increases the risk of infections include structural changes in the respiratory tract and a decrease in immune response. Cigarette smoking is a substantial risk factor for important bacterial and viral infections. For example, smokers incur a 2- to 4-fold increased risk of invasive pneumococcal disease. Influenza risk is severalfold higher and is much more severe in smokers than nonsmokers. Perhaps the greatest public health impact of smoking on infection is the increased risk of tuberculosis, a particular problem in underdeveloped countries where smoking rates are increasing rapidly. Conclusions The clinical implications of our findings include emphasizing the importance of smoking cessation as part of the therapeutic plan for people with serious infectious diseases or periodontitis, and individuals who have positive results of tuberculin skin tests. Controlling exposure to secondhand cigarette smoke in children is important to reduce the risks of meningococcal disease and otitis media, and in adults to reduce the risk of influenza and meningococcal disease. Other recommendations include pneumococcal and influenza vaccine in all smokers and acyclovir treatment for varicella in smokers.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articlepdf/217624/ira30766.pdf

Cigarette smoking and infection.

Background: Peri-implant diseases include peri-implant mucositis, describing an inflammatory lesion of the peri-implant mucosa, and peri-implantitis, which also includes loss of supporting bone.

Methods: A literature search of the Medline database (Ovid), up to 21 January 2008 was carried out using a systematic approach, in order to review the evidence for diagnosis and the risk indicators for peri-implant diseases.

Results: Experimental and clinical studies have identified various diagnostic criteria including probing parameters, radiographic assessment and peri-implant crevicular fluid and saliva analyses. Cross-sectional analyses have investigated potential risk indicators for peri-implant disease including poor oral hygiene, smoking, history of periodontitis, diabetes, genetic traits, alcohol consumption and implant surface. There is evidence that probing using a light force (0.25 N) does not damage the peri-implant tissues and that bleeding on probing (BOP) indicates presence of inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa. The probing depth, the presence of BOP, and suppuration should be assessed regularly for the diagnosis of peri-implant diseases. Radiographs are required to evaluate supporting bone levels around implants. The review identified strong evidence that poor oral hygiene, a history of periodontitis and cigarette smoking, are risk indicators for peri-implant disease. Future prospective studies are required to confirm these factors as true risk factors.

Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators

Many people sometimes experience pain when they inhale breath across the cingula, or sensitivity and/or pain when they eat ice cream, for example. In some cases, however, this can become seriously unpleasant. In those cases, one can speak of dentine hypersensitivity. In Europe, an average of 27% of the population suffers from this. Dentine hypersensitivity is characterised by a short, sharp pain reaction after a warm or cold sensation. The external sensation causes an accelerated or converse flow of fluid in the dentinal tubules that excites the extremities of the nerve cells, which results in the sensation pain. For the external sensation, it is necessary that the cingula are exposed and the dentinal tubules are open. Dentine hypersensitivity is diagnosed after other possibilities have been eliminated.

[Preventive dentistry 3. Prevalence, aetiology and diagnosis of dentine (hyper)sensitivity].

With mechanical cleaning, it is never possible to remove all bacteria from tooth surfaces, in, for example, furcation sites and at the bottom of the pocket. Supporting non-surgical periodontal treatment with the use of antimicrobial agents is, therefore, an obvious approach in order to achieve a better treatment outcome.. The combination of amoxicillin and metronidazole has been thoroughly investigated as a support in periodontal treatment and deserves a place among the tools the dental care professional has for effective treatment. However, there is at present no strict indication in which clinical situations antibiotics can be successfully prescribed. Considering responsible use of antimicrobials by healthcare professionals (antimicrobial stewardship) the decision to support periodontal treatment with antibiotics should be in the hands of those authorised to provide a prescription. Additional rinsing with chlorhexidine twice daily during periodontal treatment and the subsequent two weeks (6-8 weeks) can be considered in order to enhance the effect of clinical treatment.

Use of antimicrobial agents in periodontology

Aim: The aim of the study was to asses the effect of the use of interdental brushes (IDB) in patients as an adjunct to toothbrushing compared with toothbrushing alone or other interdental oral hygiene devices on plaque and the clinical parameters of periodontal inflammation. Material and methods: MEDLINE-PubMed and the Cochrane Central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) were searched through November 2007 to identify appropriate studies. Clinical parameters of periodontal inflammation such as plaque, gingivitis, bleeding and pockets were selected as outcome variables. Results: Independent screening of the titles and abstracts of 218 MEDLINE-PubMed and 116 Cochrane papers resulted in nine publications that met the eligibility criteria. Mean values and standard deviations were collected by data extraction. Descriptive comparisons are presented for brushing alone or brushing and woodsticks; meta-analyses were also performed for the floss comparison. Conclusion: As an adjunct to brushing, the IDB removes more dental plaque than brushing alone. Studies showed a positive significant difference using IDB with respect to the plaque scores, bleeding scores and probing pocket depth. The majority of the studies presented a positive significant difference in the plaque index when using the IDB compared with floss.

inflammation: a systematic review

Droge mond: praktische adviezen voor behandelaars van patiënten een droge mond

Objective The present study aimed to establish the efficacy of sodium hypochlorite mouthwash (NaOCl-MW) compared with a control mouthwash on plaque and clinical parameters of periodontal disease. Methods MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane-CENTRAL databases were searched for clinical trials on patients with gingivitis or periodontitis that assessed the effect of NaOCl-MW in comparison with a negative or positive control on plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and bleeding index (BI) scores and probing pocket depth (PPD). Data were extracted from the eligible studies. Results Seven eligible papers were retrieved, which together represented six clinical trials. The studies showed considerable heterogeneity regarding methodological and clinical aspects that did not permit a meta-analysis. Two of the three studies in which NaOCl-MW was compared with a negative control showed that NaOCl-MW significantly reduced PI, GI, and BI, and no effect was found on PPD. In three studies, NaOCl-MW was assessed using chlorhexidine mouthwash (CHX-MW) as a positive control; no difference was found for GI and BI. One of the three comparisons showed a statistically significant PI score favoring NaOCl-MW. One study measured PPD and found it to be significant in favor of NaOCl-MW. Conclusions Studies with a negative control group provided very weak quality evidence for a very small beneficial effect of NaOCl-MW on PI, GI, and BI scores. Studies with a positive control group provided very weak quality evidence that NaOCl-MW had a similar effect as CHX-MW on PI, GI, and BI scores. The outcome for PPD was inconclusive.

G.A. van der Weijden

Papers

[Preventive dentistry 3. Prevalence, aetiology and diagnosis of dentine (hyper)sensitivity].

Use of antimicrobial agents in periodontology

inflammation: a systematic review

Droge mond: praktische adviezen voor behandelaars van patiënten een droge mond

Effect of a sodium hypochlorite mouthwash on plaque and clinical parameters of periodontal disease