4.5 Article

Periodontitis and Inflammatory Markers in Transplant Recipients

期刊

JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY
卷 81, 期 5, 页码 666-672

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.090570

关键词

C-reactive protein; chronic periodontitis; inflammation; interleukin-6; organ transplant

资金

  1. National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland [R21DE16466]
  2. General Clinical Research Center, National Institutes of Health [M01RR06192]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Inflammation is associated with the deterioration of solid-organ transplants. Chronic periodontitis is linked to systemic inflammation, although it is unknown whether it plays a causative or comorbid role. We hypothesized that transplant subjects have a greater prevalence of severe periodontitis, accompanied by higher levels of serum interleukin-6 (1L-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP), compared to systemically healthy subjects. Methods: We recruited 90 renal and cardiac transplant recipients and 72 age-matched controls and compared their periodontal and systemic inflammatory status. Results: The prevalence of severe periodontitis was not statistically significantly different between transplant and control subjects. Serum IL-6 and CRP were higher in transplant subjects compared to control subjects and in subjects with severe periodontitis compared to subjects without periodontitis, but multivariate analysis showed that severe periodontitis was a significant positive predictor of serum IL-6 in the control group only. In the test group, significant predictors of systemic inflammation were age, diabetes, higher body mass index, and a cadaveric transplant donor. Conclusion: Despite the presence of higher levels of systemic markers of inflammation in transplant subjects with severe periodontitis compared to transplant subjects without periodontitis, periodontal parameters were not statistical predictors of systemic inflammation in this population in a multivariate model. J Periodontol 2010;81:666-672.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据