4.1 Article

Salivary gland involvement and oral health in patients with coeliac disease

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES
卷 130, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/eos.12861

关键词

aphthous stomatitis; caries; salivary dysfunction; sialadenitis; xerostomia

资金

  1. Danish Dental Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that patients with coeliac disease are more likely to experience dry mouth, mucosal lesions, dry/cracked lips, and focal lymphocytic sialadenitis. However, there is no significant difference in dental health and levels of cariogenic bacteria and Candida compared to healthy controls.
Coeliac disease (CD) is a chronic immune-mediated enteropathy triggered by ingestion of gluten. The aim of this study was to investigate if the salivary glands as a component of the mucosal immune system are involved in CD, leading to sialadenitis and salivary gland dysfunction and associated oral manifestations. Twenty patients with CD aged 49.2 (SD 15.5 years) and 20 age- and gender-matched healthy controls underwent an interview regarding general and oral health, serological analysis, a clinical oral examination including bitewing radiographs, Candida smear, assessment of salivary mutans streptococci and lactobacilli levels, unstimulated and chewing-stimulated whole and parotid saliva flow rates, analysis of secretory IgA, and a labial salivary gland biopsy. Xerostomia, mucosal lesions, dry/cracked lips and focal lymphocytic sialadenitis were more prevalent and extensive in patients with CD than in healthy controls. Moreover, the patients had less gingival inflammation and higher whole saliva flow rates than the healthy controls, but did not differ regarding dental health and levels of cariogenic bacteria and Candida. The major salivary gland function appears unaffected, contributing to maintenance of a balanced microbiota and oral health in CD patients. Xerostomia and labial dryness may be related to minor salivary gland inflammation and subsequent impaired mucosal lubrication.

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

4.1
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