The combined use of salivary biomarkers and clinical parameters to predict the outcome of scaling and root planing: A cohort study
Yiying Liu,Dingyu Duan,Rui Ma,Yi Ding,Yi Xu,Xuedong Zhou,Lei Zhao,Xin Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13367
IF: 7.478
2020-10-13
Journal Of Clinical Periodontology
Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Aim</h3><p>To explore the application of the combined use of baseline salivary biomarkers and clinical parameters in predicting the outcome of scaling and root planing (SRP).</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Materials and methods</h3><p>Forty patients with advanced periodontitis were included. Baseline saliva samples were analyzed for interleukin‐1β, matrix metalloproteinase‐8, and the loads of <i>Porphyromonas gingivalis</i>,<i> Prevotella intermedia</i>,<i> Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans</i>, and <i>Tannerella forsythia</i>. After SRP, pocket closure and further attachment loss at 6 months post‐treatment were chosen as outcome variables. Models to predict the outcomes were established by generalized estimating equations. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>The combined use of baseline clinical attachment level, site location and interleukin‐1β (AUC=0.764) better predicted pocket closure than probing depth (AUC=0.672), clinical attachment level (AUC=0.679), site location (AUC=0.654), or interleukin‐1β (AUC=0.579) alone. The combination of site location, tooth loss, percentage of deep pockets, detection of <i>A. actinomycetemcomitans</i>, and <i>T. forsythia</i> load (AUC=0.842) better predicted further clinical attachment loss than site location (AUC=0.715), tooth loss (AUC=0.530), percentage of deep pockets (AUC=0.659), or <i>T. forsythia</i> load (AUC=0.647) alone. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusion</h3><p>The combination of baseline salivary biomarkers and clinical parameters better predicted SRP outcomes than each alone. The current study indicates the possible usefulness of salivary biomarkers in addition to tooth related parameters in predicting SRP outcomes.</p></section>
dentistry, oral surgery & medicine