Reports on the association of periodontal disease (PD) with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have regularly been published. PD is a set of chronic inflammatory conditions linked to a dysbiotic microbial biofilm, which affects the periodontal tissues, resulting eventually in their destruction and contributing to systemic inflammation. SLE is a multi-system chronic inflammatory autoimmune disease that has a wide range of clinical presentations, touching multiple organ systems. Many epidemiological studies have investigated the two-way relationship between PD and SLE, though their results are heterogeneous. SLE and PD are multifactorial conditions and many biological-based hypotheses suggest common physiopathological pathways between the two diseases, including genetics, microbiology, immunity, and environmental common risk factors. By focusing on recent clinical and translational research, this review aimed to discuss and give an overview of the relationship of SLE with PD, as well as looking at the similarities in the immune-pathological aspects and the possible mechanisms connecting the development and progression of both diseases.

(1) Aim: The purpose of this study was to assess patients’ and practitioners’ reported experience measures (PREMs) following a first standard orthodontic consultation (face-to-face consultation) versus a first orthodontic teleconsultation (video-assisted remote orthodontic consultation).; (2) Materials and Methods: This study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which 60 patients were randomly allocated to two groups. In the control group, patients received a first face-to-face consultation (n = 30) whereas, in the test group, patients received a first orthodontic teleconsultation (n = 30). Patients as well as the orthodontic practitioners completed questionnaires after the experience. (3) Results: From the patients’ point of view, overall satisfaction was comparable between the control group and the test group (p = 0.23). Quality of communication with the clinician, understanding of the explanations provided and a sense of privacy were also comparable between the two groups. However, from the practitioners’ perspective, overall satisfaction after the face-to-face consultation was significantly higher than after the first remote consultation (p < 0.01). (4) Conclusions: In the context of a first orthodontic consultation, teleorthodontics appears to be an interesting and complementary approach to a classical face-to-face appointment, but which should by no means become systematic.

No abstract