ABSTRACT
Periodontal disease is very common in pregnant women. Paraprobiotics are a subset of probiotics. They can be defined as inactivated microbial cells providing health benefits to the host and are considered particularly safe. The aim of this study was to compare the periodontal health of pregnant women and puerperae after 6 months of home use of paraprobiotics. A total of 30 pregnant women were enrolled and divided into two groups: the test group, who had to use a paraprobiotic-based toothpaste (Biorepair Peribioma Pro, Coswell S.p.A., Funo di Argelato, BO, Italy) and mousse (Mousse Mouthwash Biorepair Peribioma, Coswell S.p.A.) twice a day, and the control group, who had to use only the paraprobiotic-based toothpaste. The time frames of the study were: 1 month (T1), 3 months (T2) and 6 months (T3), and data were collected during pregnancy and in the period immediately following delivery. The following indices were evaluated at T0, T1, T2 and T3: clinical attachment loss (CAL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque control record (PCR), modified marginal gingival index (mMGI), papillary marginal gingival index (PMGI) and recessions (R). All data were subjected to statistical analysis. PCR decreased significantly from T0 to T1 in the control group and from T0 to T2 and from T0 to T3 in the test group. BOP tended to decrease in both groups, but a significant reduction was observed only in the test group. CAL, PPD, PMGI and mMGI tended to decrease gradually in both groups without significant differences between or within groups. The combination of the paraprobiotic-based toothpaste and the paraprobiotic-based mousse significantly reduced BoP and plaque control over time, although there were no significant differences with the use of the paraprobiotic-based toothpaste alone. In addition, the combination of the two products promoted a trend towards the better stabilization of recessions.
ABSTRACT
Although influenza is a major public health concern, little is known about the use of spray live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) among adults. For this reason, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of LAIV, especially in adults with/without clinical conditions and children <2 years, with the final aim of possibly extending the clinical indications. PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus were the two databases consulted through February 2021. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. A critical appraisal was conducted. Analyses were performed by using ProMeta3 software. Twenty-two studies were included, showing that LAIV was associated with a higher probability of seroconversion when compared with a placebo and considering the A/H1N1 serotype (pooled OR = 2.26 (95% CI = 1.12-4.54), p-value = 0.022; based on 488 participants, without heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%)). The meta-analysis also confirmed no significant association with systemic adverse events. Only rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and sore throat were significantly associated with LAIV compared to the placebo. Despite limited available evidence, LAIV has proved to be a safe and effective flu vaccination, also due to its very low invasiveness, and our review's results can be considered a starting point for guiding future research and shaping forthcoming vaccination campaigns.
