4.5 Review

A meta-analysis of the association between the presence of Helicobacter pylori and periodontal diseases

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 98, Issue 22, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015922

Keywords

Helicobacter pylori; meta-analysis; periodontal disease

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81774451]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province [2017A030313827]
  3. Outstanding Youth Foundation of Guangdong Province Colleges and Universities [YQ2015041]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the association between the presence of Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) and periodontal disease (PD). Methods: PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched to identify eligible articles published from inception up to April 2018. Further articles were retrieved through a manual search of recent reviews. Cross-sectional studies, case-control studies and cohort studies reporting the association between H pylori and PD were included. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results: Four case-control studies and nine cross-sectional studies were included. A total of 6800 patients were included in this review. The odds for oral H pylori positivity was 2.31 times (95% CI: 1.99-2.68) greater than those without H pylori. Subgroup analyses involving different study locations, designs, and types of study population showed the similar results. The pooled OR for the gastric disease patients was the largest (3.50, 95% CI: 2.22-5.53, five articles). Stomach H pylori was also significantly associated with PD, with OR 2.90 (95% CI: 1.37-6.14, two articles). Conclusions: This meta-analysis supports an association between H pylori and PD. More well-designed studies, especially prospective cohort studies are necessary to confirm these results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available