4.6 Article

Concentration of interleukin-lβ and neutrophil elastase activity in gingival crevicular fluid during experimental gingivitis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages 544-549

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2001.028006544.x

Keywords

interleukin-1 beta; elastase-activity; experimental gingivitis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background, aim: The aim of the present study was to measure interleukin-1 beta concentrations and neutrophil elastase activity in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) during experimental gingivitis in humans. Material and Methods: 12 healthy young men participated. After prophylaxis, they performed optimal hygiene to reach plaque and gingivitis indices of or approaching zero. All oral hygiene measures were then ceased for a period of 18 days. The Quigley-Hein plaque index (PLI) and Saxer & Muhlemann papillary bleeding index (PBI) were assessed. GCF samples were taken from the mesiobuccal site of two contralateral teeth in the upper jaw by means of periopapers at baseline and on days 3, 7, 14 and 18. After measuring the gingival crevicular fluid volume (GCFV) with the Periotron 8000, the samples were analyzed in our laboratory for the detection of IL-1 beta concentration by ELISA. Results: PLI and PBI showed a reduction prior to baseline reaching almost zero, both increasing from day 0 to day 18 (PLI=from 0.1 to 2.9, PBI-from 0 to 2.0). IL-1 beta concentration increased from 229.25 ng/ml (day 0) to 526.13 ng/ml (day 18). Clinical data and IL-1 beta concentrations were correlated with elastase activity (EA). No significant correlation could be demonstrated between the clinical parameters assessed and IL-1 beta or EA (Spearman rank correlation coefficient). A correlation between GCFV and PBI from day 0 to day 18 could be demonstrated. Conclusion: Overall, both IL-1 beta and EA showed an increase from baseline throughout the whole study.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available