Are periodontitis and dental caries associated? A systematic review with meta-analyses.

AIM: The epidemiological relationship between periodontitis and caries remains controversial, and evidence synthesis is currently lacking. Therefore, this systematic review was designed to answer the following PECO question: 'In human adults (P), do subjects suffering from periodontitis (E) have higher presence/number of untreated carious lesions and caries experience (O) than subjects not suffering from periodontitis (C)?'. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational studies that met specific inclusion criteria established to answer to the PECO question were included. Two review authors independently searched for eligible studies, screened the titles and abstracts, carried out the full text analysis, extracted the data and performed the risk of bias assessment. In case of disagreement, a third review author took the final decision during ad hoc consensus meetings. Data synthesis was carried out through random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies on 21 cohorts, involving 135,018 participants, were included. Meta-analyses showed a significant association between periodontitis and the presence of at least one tooth with either untreated carious lesions (odds ratio [OR] = 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32-2.01; p <.00; I2 = 83.0%) or caries experience (decayed and filled teeth ≥ 1) (OR = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.01-1.59; p = .038; I2 = 90.0%). Moreover, subjects with periodontitis exhibited a higher number of surfaces (difference in means [MD] = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.46-1.27; p <.001; I2 = 0.0%) and teeth (MD = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.28-0.42; p <.001; I2 = 69.6%) with untreated carious lesions, as well as a higher number of teeth with caries experience (standardized difference in means [SMD] = 1.46; 95% CI: 0.15-2.78; p = .029; I2 = 98.9%) compared with those without periodontitis. Sensitivity analyses focusing on severe periodontitis as exposure mostly showed consistent results. Estimates for caries experience were only slightly attenuated in adjusted models compared with crude models. Subgroup analyses by caries location also indicated that periodontitis was associated only with root caries, while it was not with caries affecting the anatomical crown. CONCLUSIONS: Periodontitis was found to be associated with the presence and number of treated/untreated root carious lesions. Therefore, caries-specific preventive measures (e.g., fluorides) should be considered for individuals with periodontitis.

Bone heat generated using conventional implant drills versus piezosurgery unit during apical cortical plate perforation.

BACKGROUND: The apical portion of the implant osteotomy receives less irrigation and cooling during surgical preparation. High bone temperature, above the critical 10°C threshold, may impair osseointegration, particularly around dense cortical bone. The aim of this study was to evaluate the apical cortical plate temperature increase with two different devices and pressure loads in a porcine rib ex vivo model. METHODS: A total of 24 implant sites were prepared on porcine ribs, divided into 4 groups of 6 samples each, according to the device used (conventional drill system or piezosurgery) and pressure load applied (1,000 g or 1,500 g). A rubber dam was used to isolate the apical cortical plate from the cooling effect of irrigation. Temperature variation measurements were taken using an infrared thermometer. RESULTS: The piezosurgery unit was two times more likely to increase the osteotomy temperature by 10°C (OR = 2; 95% CI 1.136, 3.522; P < 0.05). The average temperature increase was 0.07°C (SD = 0.10) for group 1 (drill system 1,000 g); 0.22°C (SD = 0.26) for group 2 (drill system 1,500 g); 9.18°C (SD = 4.51) for group 3 (piezosurgery 1,000 g); and 8.17°C (SD = 6.12) for group 4 (piezosurgery 1,500 g). The piezosurgery site preparation had significantly higher temperature increase than did the conventional drill site preparation (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in temperature change between the two pressure loads applied (P = 0.78). Temperature increases exceeded the critical 10°C threshold in half of the samples prepared with the piezoelectric device. CONCLUSIONS: Bone overheating using a piezosurgery unit is a potential risk during implant site preparation. The piezosurgical device resulted in significantly higher temperatures than did conventional drilling at the apical cortical portion of the osteotomy. The temperature increase was often higher than the critical 10°C threshold.