Can different stages of leprosy treatment influence the profile of oral health? Oral status in leprosy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of study was to evaluate the oral health status, salivary flow and halitosis among individuals diagnosed with leprosy as compared with healthy subjects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sample of 160 individuals was allocated into four groups, as follows: (G1) individuals with complete leprosy treatment; (G2) individuals diagnosed with leprosy and under multi-drug therapy; (G3) individuals diagnosed with leprosy not yet under treatment; and (G4) healthy individuals. Then individuals were submitted to periodontal clinical examination (visible plaque index, bleeding index, depth of probing and clinical attachment level); DMFT index (decayed-missing-filled teeth index); evaluation of salivary flow and halitosis using a halimeter equipment (Interscan Corp, Chatsworth, CA, USA). RESULTS: The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests. The mean DMFT was found to be higher than 6.6, which is considered very high, with no significant difference between groups (P>0.05). As for salivary flow, 76.2% of the subjects presented normal flow rates, while 10% and 13.7% showed low and very low salivary flow rates, respectively, with hyposalivation being mostly observed in Groups 1 and 2. The highest prevalence of noticeable odor was found in healthy individuals (G4), and the most prevalent periodontal diagnosis was gingivitis (63.1%) in Group 3 (individuals with leprosy not yet under multi-drug therapy) followed by periodontitis (25%) in Group 1 (individuals who had completed leprosy treatment). CONCLUSIONS: It was observed that individuals with a history of leprosy present poor oral health similar to that of systemically healthy individuals.

Oral and endotracheal tubes colonization by periodontal bacteria: a case-control ICU study.

Periodontal infection is a possible risk factor for respiratory disorders; however, no studies have assessed the colonization of periodontal pathogens in endotracheal tubes (ET). This case-control study analyzed whether periodontal pathogens are able to colonize ET of dentate and edentulous patients in intensive care units (ICU) and whether oral and ET periodontal pathogen profiles have any correlation between these patients. We selected 18 dentate and 18 edentulous patients from 78 eligible ICU patients. Oral clinical examination including probing depth, clinical attachment level, gingival index , and plaque index was performed by a single examiner, followed by oral and ET sampling and processing by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (total bacterial load, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Tannerella forsythia). Data were statistically analyzed by Mann-Whitney U, two-way analysis of variance (p < 0.05). Among dentate, there was no correlation between clinical parameters and ET bacterial levels. Both dentate and edentulous patients showed similar ET bacterial levels. Dentate patients showed no correlation between oral and ET bacterial levels, while edentulous patients showed positive correlations between oral and ET levels of A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. gingivalis, and T. forsythia. Periodontal pathogens can colonize ET and the oral cavity of ICU patients. Periodontal pathogen profiles tend to be similar between dentate and edentulous ICU patients. In ICU patients, oral cavity represents a source of ET contamination. Although accompanied by higher oral bacterial levels, teeth do not seem to influence ET bacterial profiles.