3.9 Article

Effects of periodontal therapy on C-reactive protein and HDL in serum of subjects with periodontitis

期刊

出版社

SOC BRASIL CIRURGIA CARDIOVASC
DOI: 10.5935/1678-9741.20140013

关键词

C-Reactive Protein; Periodontal Diseases; Cardiovascular Diseases

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate the effects of nonsurgical periodontal therapy on levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein in the sera and its association with body mass index and high density lipoprotein in subjects with severe periodontitis. Methods: Sera from 28 subjects (mean age: 34.36 +/- 6.24; 32% men) with severe periodontitis and 27 healthy controls (mean age: 33.18 +/- 6.42; 33% men) were collected prior to periodontal therapy. Blood samples were obtained from 23 subjects who completed therapy (9-12 months). Oral and systemic parameters such as the number of blood cells, glucose examination, lipid profile, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels accessed by high-sensitivity immunonephelometry assay, were included. Results: Before therapy, in the periodontitis group, the ratio of subjects with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein <0.3 mg/dL was statistically lower than in the control group (P<0.0216). After therapy, the ratio of subjects with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein <0.3 mg/dL was significantly higher (65.22%) (P<0.0339). The mean value for body mass index was statistically lower in subjects with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein <0.3 mg/dL (24.63 +/- 4.19), compared with those with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein >= 0.3 mg/dL (28.91 +/- 6.03) (P<0.0411). High density lipoprotein presented a mean value statistically higher after therapy (P<0.0027). Conclusion: In systemically healthy subjects with periodontitis, periodontal therapy was associated with decreased levels of circulating high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and increase of high density lipoprotein in serum. The clinical trial was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.br/, No. RBR-24T799.

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

3.9
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