3.8 Review

Impact of dietary supplementation with coenzyme Q10 on periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

PHARMANUTRITION
卷 23, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.phanu.2022.100328

关键词

Periodontal disease; CoQ10; Gingival index; Pocket depth; Clinical attachment Loss; Plaque index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A systematic review of controlled trials was conducted to explore the impact of CoQ10 supplementation on periodontitis. The results showed that CoQ10 supplementation significantly reduced clinical attachment loss and gingival index, but did not have a significant effect on plaque index, probing depth, and bleeding index. Further research is needed to draw conclusive results.
To explore the impact of CoQ10 supplementation on periodontitis, a systematic review of controlled trials (PROSPERO: CRD42021274876) was performed from 1970 to November 2022 through Web of Science (ISI), Google Scholar, Embase, CENTRAL, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and ProQuest. A random-effect model was used considering clinical attachment loss (CAL), plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), bleeding index (BI), and probing depth (PD). Of 97 records, eight trials were included. CoQ10 supplementation significantly reduce CAL (WMD, -0.66 (-0.81 to -0.50), P < 0.0001; I2 = 93.4 %) and GI (WMD, -0.20 (-0.40-0.00), P = 0.05; I2 = 98.5 %), but it could not affect PI (WMD, -0.07 (-0.16-0.02), P = 0.11, I2 = 91.2 %), PD (WMD, -0.28 (-0.67-0.12), P = 0.17; I2 = 98.4 %), and BI (WMD, -0.58 (-1.40-0.24), P = 0.17; I2 = 99.5 %) significantly. CoQ10 had a stronger reduction effect on PI and GI in individuals >= 40 years old and in doses of <= 60 mg CoQ10. Longer duration of CoQ10 supplementation was also more effective in reducing PD. CAL reduced greater when CoQ10 was administered for longer than 12 weeks, in a dose of > 60 mg, and in younger individuals. CoQ10 supple-mentation in periodontitis may have beneficial effect on GI and CAL. Further investigations in this regard are needed to draw conclusive results.

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

3.8
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