Oral Chlamydia trachomatis in patients with established periodontitis

Abstract

Periodontitis is considered a consequence of a pathogenic microbial infection at the periodontal site and host susceptibility factors. Periodontal research supports the association of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Bacteroides forsythus, and periodontitis; however causality has not been demonstrated. In pursuit of the etiology of periodontitis, we hypothesized that the intracellular bacteria, Chlamydia trachomatis, may play a role. As a first step, a cross-sectional study of dental school clinic patients with established periodontitis were assessed for the presence of C. trachomatis in the oral cavity, and in particular from the lining epithelium of periodontal sites. C. trachomatis was detected using a direct fluorescent monoclonal antibody (DFA) in oral specimens from 7% (6/87) of the patients. Four patients tested positive in specimens from the lining epithelium of diseased periodontal sites, one patient tested positive in healthy periodontal sites, and one patient tested positive in the general mucosal specimen. In conclusion, this study provides preliminary evidence of C. trachomatis in the periodontal sites. Planned studies include the use of a more precise periodontal epithelial cell collection device, the newer nucleic acid amplification techniques to detect C. trachomatis, and additional populations to determine the association of C. trachomatis and periodontitis.

Chlamydia trachomatis in the gingival sulcus and pharynx in patients of Northeast Mexico

“…Although it could be considered that the number of individuals evaluated for this study is low, the presence of C. trachomatis in the pharynx and gingival sulcus in 53% of these patients indicates that it is necessary to routinely search for these microorganisms in the community. Our results compared with other studies are contradictory, since others report a lower percentage of C. trachomatis in the sulcus and the pharynx (Chan et al, 2016; Danby et al, 2016; Dukers‐Muijrers et al, 2015; Reed et al, 2000). More information is necessary to identify these discrepancies.…”

“…Chlamydia trachomatis is a Gram‐negative obligate intracellular bacterium with a propensity for the mucous membranes of their host. C. trachomatis is a common pathogen of the genital tract; however, it can live in any mucous membrane to which it adheres, including the mucosa of the oral cavity (Reed, Lopatin, Foxman, & Burt, 2000), pharynx, and other extra genital areas (Chan et al, 2016).…”

Periodontal Disease and Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease: Does the Evidence Support an Independent Association?

“…Subgingival microflora in gingivitis represent a transition between that associated with health and periodontitis, 38 in which subgingival microflora shifts from being predominately gram-positive to an increased number of obligate anaerobic gram-negative organisms, such as Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola, and Selenomonas noxia, as well as Campylobacter rectus, Aggregatibacter (formerly Actinobacillus) actinomycetemcomitans, and Prevotella intermedia, and spirochetes. [35][36][37][38][39][40][41] Other microorganisms found in PD include Chlamydophila pneumoniae 42 ; Mycoplasma 43,44 ; Helicobacter pylori [45][46][47] ; candida 48 -51 ; Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus, and herpesviruses [52][53][54] ; ameba 55 ; methane-producing microorganisms called archaea 56 -59 ; and sulfate-reducing bacteria and archaea. 60,61 Epithelium in the gingival sulcus interacts with bacteria in the subgingival crevicular space, generating and transmitting signals between bacteria and adjacent immune cells.…”

Relationship between invasion of theperiodontiumby periodontal pathogens and periodontal disease: a systematic review

“…One study was in Japanese and was excluded. 36 Twenty-two studies were subsequently excluded for specific reasons: 3 studies 34,35,37 had a study protocol not related to the objectives of this systematic review, 8 studies 14,[25][26][27]30,39,40,42 had absence of control group (non-diseased samples), one study 38 only presented disease samples from a single patient, 7 studies 28,29,[31][32][33]41,44 hadn't clearly defined inclusion and/or exclusion criteria, and finally 3 studies 43,45,46 were excluded because they only addressed opportunistic pathogens. Additional hand searching of the reference lists of the selected papers didn't retrieve any additional studies.…”