Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with several microvascular and macrovascular complications, such as retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy, and cardiovascular diseases. The pathogenesis of these complications is complex, and involves metabolic and hemodynamic disturbances, including hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and immune dysfunction. These disturbances initiate several damaging processes, such as increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, inflammation, and ischemia. These processes mainly exert their damaging effect on endothelial and nerve cells, hence the susceptibility of densely vascularized and innervated sites, such as the eyes, kidneys, and nerves. Since the oral cavity is also highly vascularized and innervated, oral complications can be expected as well. The relationship between DM and oral diseases has received considerable attention in the past few decades. However, most studies only focus on periodontitis, and still approach DM from the limited perspective of elevated blood glucose levels only. In this review, we will assess other potential oral complications as well, including: dental caries, dry mouth, oral mucosal lesions, oral cancer, taste disturbances, temporomandibular disorders, burning mouth syndrome, apical periodontitis, and peri-implant diseases. Each oral complication will be briefly introduced, followed by an assessment of the literature studying epidemiological associations with DM. We will also elaborate on pathogenic mechanisms that might explain associations between DM and oral complications. To do so, we aim to expand our perspective of DM by not only considering elevated blood glucose levels, but also including literature about the other important pathogenic mechanisms, such as insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and immune dysfunction.

Background Since periodontitis is bi-directionally associated with several systemic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases, it is important for medical professionals in a non-dental setting to be able examine their patients for symptoms of periodontitis, and urge them to visit a dentist if necessary. However, they often lack the time, knowledge and resources to do so. We aim to develop and assess “quick and easy” screening tools for periodontitis, based on self-reported oral health (SROH), demographics and/or salivary biomarkers, intended for use by medical professionals in a non-dental setting. Methods Consecutive, new patients from our outpatient clinic were recruited. A SROH questionnaire (8 questions) was conducted, followed by a 30 s oral rinse sampling protocol. A complete clinical periodontal examination provided the golden standard periodontitis classification: no/mild, moderate or severe periodontitis. Total periodontitis was defined as having either moderate or severe. Albumin and matrix metalloproteinase-8 concentrations, and chitinase and protease activities were measured in the oral rinses. Binary logistic regression analyses with backward elimination were used to create prediction models for both total and severe periodontitis. Model 1 included SROH, demographics and biomarkers. The biomarkers were omitted in the analysis for model 2, while model 3 only included the SROH questionnaire. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCC) provided the accuracy of each model. The regression equations were used to create scoring algorithms, composed of the remaining predictors, each with its own weight. Results Of the 156 patients participating in this study, 67% were classified with total periodontitis and 33% had severe periodontitis. The models for total periodontitis achieved an AUROCC of 0.91 for model 1, 0.88 for model 2 and 0.81 for model 3. For severe periodontitis, this was 0.89 for model 1, 0.82 for model 2 and 0.78 for model 3. The algorithm for total periodontitis (model 2), which we consider valid for the Dutch population, was applied to create a freely accessible, web-based screening tool. Conclusions The prediction models for total and severe periodontitis proved to be feasible and accurate, resulting in easily applicable screening tools, intended for a non-dental setting. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12903-019-0784-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Guidelines for primary diabetes care recommend to pay attention to oral health in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2DM). However, research about dental care utilization and the extent of problems regarding oral health in these patients is limited. Purpose: To assess self-reported oral health, general health-related quality of life (QoL) and oral health-related QoL in patients with T2DM who regularly attend a family physician office. Methods: Family physician offices were recruited in the area of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, as part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial. At these offices, patients with T2DM were included by family physicians and/or nurse practitioners. Patient data on general characteristics, self-reported oral health (including periodontitis), general health-related QoL (SF-36) and oral health-related QoL (OHIP-NL14) were collected. Results: Twenty-four family physician offices participated, who enrolled 764 patients with T2DM (mean age: 65.9±10.7 years, 56% male, 16% smoker). Almost 11% of the patients were metabolically poorly controlled (HbA1c >63 mmol/mol), 39% were obese (body mass index≥30 kg/m 2), 37% had hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg) and 44% had dyslipidemia (LDL-cholesterol >2.5 mmol/L). About a quarter (24%) reported not to visit a dentist regularly and 30% did not have dental insurance coverage. Furthermore, 16% of the patients were edentulous and having full dental prostheses, while 29% had a partial dental prosthesis. Pain in the mouth, dry mouth and bad breath were reported by 15%, 37% and 12% of the patients, respectively. Almost 70% suffered from periodontitis. Oral health-related QoL was impaired in 19% of the patients, and those subjects also had worse general health-related QoL. Conclusion: Almost a quarter of patients with T2DM at Dutch family physician offices does not visit the dentist regularly. The estimated prevalence of periodontitis is particularly high, but other oral health complaints and impaired oral health-related QoL are also relatively common. Keywords: self-reported oral health, oral health-related quality of life, diabetes mellitus type 2, primary care, family physician

Objectives Medical professionals should advise their patients to visit a dentist if necessary. Due to the lack of time and knowledge, screening for periodontitis is often not done. To alleviate this problem, a screening model for total (own teeth/gum health, gum treatment, loose teeth, mouthwash use, and age)/severe periodontitis (gum treatment, loose teeth, tooth appearance, mouthwash use, age, and sex) in a medical care setting was developed in the Academic Center of Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA) [1]. The purpose of the present study was to externally validate this tool in an outpatient medical setting. Materials and methods Patients were requited in an outpatient medical setting as the validation cohort. The self-reported oral health questionnaire was conducted, demographic data were collected, and periodontal examination was performed. Algorithm discrimination was expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Calibration plots were made. Results For predicting total periodontitis, the AUROCC was 0.59 with a sensitivity of 49% and specificity of 68%. The PPV was 57% and the NPV scored 55%. For predicting severe periodontitis, the AUROCC was 0.73 with a sensitivity of 71% and specificity of 63%. The PPV was 39% and the NPV 87%. Conclusions The performance of the algorithm for severe periodontitis is found to be sufficient in the current medical study population. Further external validation of periodontitis algorithms in non-dental school populations is recommended. Clinical relevance Because general physicians are obligated to screen patients for periodontitis, it is our general goal that they can use a prediction model in medical settings without an oral examination.

PURPOSE Although diabetes care guidelines recommend paying attention to oral health, the effect on daily practice has been limited, and patients with diabetes have yet to benefit. We investigated whether implementation of an oral care protocol for general practitioners (GPs [family physicians]) can improve patientcentered outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS Twenty-four GP offices were randomly assigned to the experimental or control group (12 offices each). In the experimental group, GPs and nurse practitioners implemented an oral care protocol. No extra attention was given to oral health in the control group. The primary outcome parameter was oral health-related quality of life (QoL) assessed with the 14-item Oral Health Impact Profile at baseline and 1 year later. Other outcomes were self-reported oral health complaints and general health-related QoL (36-item Short Form Health Survey). RESULTSOf 764 patients with type 2 diabetes, 543 (71.1%) completed the 1-year follow-up. More patients reported improved oral health-related QoL in the experimental group (35.2%) compared to the control group (25.9%) (P = .046; P adj = .049). In a secondary post hoc analysis including GP offices with ≥60% patient follow-up (n = 18), improvement was 38.3% and 24.9%, respectively (P and P adj = .011). Improvement of self-reported oral health complaints did not differ between groups. The intervention had no effect on general healthrelated QoL, with the exception of the concept scale score for changes in health over time (P adj = .033).CONCLUSIONS Implementation of an oral care protocol in primary diabetes care improved oral health-related QoL in patients with type 2 diabetes.