Abstract:BACKGROUND
This study was conducted to assess if statin intake is associated with clinical parameters of periodontitis and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) of nondiabetic and diabetic patients.
METHODS
We first determined the effect of simvastatin on MMP expression in mononuclear cells. We then recruited 117 nondiabetic and diabetic patients, who all had periodontitis and took or did not take statin, and measured periodontal probing depth (PPD) and clinical attachment … Show more
“…30,31 The use of EDTA gel at neutral pH (24%) as a root surface conditioner was carried out for smear layer removal, exposing dentine collagen fibers and increasing the diameter of the dentinal tubules 32,33 which could enhance migration and attachment of fibroblast 34,35 and could allow more SMV local adsorption to the root surface improving its availability. [36][37][38] Many studies reported that EDTA root surface etching could enhance drug availability over the root surfaces or in the GCF like chlorhexidine 39 and doxycycline. 40,41 Filter paper was used for GCF sampling as it is the easiest and a more precise method for GCF collection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 These could be attributed to the added values of SMV used in the present study for both groups with its known effect on fibroblastic proliferation. 30 SMV was found to inhibit tissue degrading enzymes like MMPs 38,39 and have anti-microbial properties. 40,41 Many studies reported positive results during the regeneration of periodontal bone defects after the application of SMV with methylcellulose gel.…”
Background
Perforated barrier membranes (PBM) were suggested to enhance periodontal regeneration by allowing positive charity of wanted elements from the gingival tissue side. The present study was designed to evaluate clinically and biochemically the use of PBM combined with simvastatin (SMV) gel with and without an associated EDTA gel root surface etching as a suggested option that could improve SMV availability and clinical outcomes of PBM.
Methods
Forty patients having moderate‐to‐severe chronic periodontitis with 40 intrabony defects were randomly divided into four treatment groups (10 sites each). Patients in group 1 received 1.2% SMV gel and covering the defect with occlusive membrane (OM). Patients in group 2 received 1.2% SMV gel and covering the defect with PBM. Group 3 received 24% EDTA root surface etching, 1.2% SMV gel, and defect coverage with OM (eOM). Patients in group 4 were treated as in group 3 but the defect was covered with PBM (ePBM). Clinical parameters were recorded at baseline before surgical procedures and were reassessed at 6 and 9 months after therapy. The mean concentration of SMV in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) was estimated by reverse‐phase high‐performance liquid chromatography at days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 30.
Results
At 6‐ and 9‐month observation periods, groups 3 and 4 showed a statistically significant improvement in PD reduction and CAL gain compared with groups 1 and 2. Group 4 showed a statistically significant more defect fill compared with groups 1, 2, and 3 (P ≤ .05). Group 2 showed statistically significant higher defect fill compared with group 1 and group 3 (P < .05). Bone density was significantly increased with no significant difference between the four groups at 6‐ and 9‐month observation periods. SMV‐GCF concentration in group 4 showed the highest mean concentration with no significant difference than that of group 3.
Conclusion
The use of perforated barrier membranes in association with SMV enhances the clinical hard tissue parameters compared with occlusive ones in treating intrabony periodontal defects. Moreover, EDTA root surface treatment could enhance SMV availability in the defect area.
“…30,31 The use of EDTA gel at neutral pH (24%) as a root surface conditioner was carried out for smear layer removal, exposing dentine collagen fibers and increasing the diameter of the dentinal tubules 32,33 which could enhance migration and attachment of fibroblast 34,35 and could allow more SMV local adsorption to the root surface improving its availability. [36][37][38] Many studies reported that EDTA root surface etching could enhance drug availability over the root surfaces or in the GCF like chlorhexidine 39 and doxycycline. 40,41 Filter paper was used for GCF sampling as it is the easiest and a more precise method for GCF collection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 These could be attributed to the added values of SMV used in the present study for both groups with its known effect on fibroblastic proliferation. 30 SMV was found to inhibit tissue degrading enzymes like MMPs 38,39 and have anti-microbial properties. 40,41 Many studies reported positive results during the regeneration of periodontal bone defects after the application of SMV with methylcellulose gel.…”
Background
Perforated barrier membranes (PBM) were suggested to enhance periodontal regeneration by allowing positive charity of wanted elements from the gingival tissue side. The present study was designed to evaluate clinically and biochemically the use of PBM combined with simvastatin (SMV) gel with and without an associated EDTA gel root surface etching as a suggested option that could improve SMV availability and clinical outcomes of PBM.
Methods
Forty patients having moderate‐to‐severe chronic periodontitis with 40 intrabony defects were randomly divided into four treatment groups (10 sites each). Patients in group 1 received 1.2% SMV gel and covering the defect with occlusive membrane (OM). Patients in group 2 received 1.2% SMV gel and covering the defect with PBM. Group 3 received 24% EDTA root surface etching, 1.2% SMV gel, and defect coverage with OM (eOM). Patients in group 4 were treated as in group 3 but the defect was covered with PBM (ePBM). Clinical parameters were recorded at baseline before surgical procedures and were reassessed at 6 and 9 months after therapy. The mean concentration of SMV in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) was estimated by reverse‐phase high‐performance liquid chromatography at days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 30.
Results
At 6‐ and 9‐month observation periods, groups 3 and 4 showed a statistically significant improvement in PD reduction and CAL gain compared with groups 1 and 2. Group 4 showed a statistically significant more defect fill compared with groups 1, 2, and 3 (P ≤ .05). Group 2 showed statistically significant higher defect fill compared with group 1 and group 3 (P < .05). Bone density was significantly increased with no significant difference between the four groups at 6‐ and 9‐month observation periods. SMV‐GCF concentration in group 4 showed the highest mean concentration with no significant difference than that of group 3.
Conclusion
The use of perforated barrier membranes in association with SMV enhances the clinical hard tissue parameters compared with occlusive ones in treating intrabony periodontal defects. Moreover, EDTA root surface treatment could enhance SMV availability in the defect area.
“…In particular, statins are shown to be effective against A. actinomycetemcomitans and Porphyromonas gingivalis , 2 of the major species of bacteria implicated in periodontitis pathogenesis. Furthermore, statins are shown to inhibit tissue‐degrading enzymes (i.e., matrix metalloproteinases) and to exert a pro‐proliferative effect on mesenchymal stromal cells and endothelial progenitor cells . Statins are also shown to enhance osteoblastic differentiation and viability, bone morphogenetic protein and vascular endothelial growth factor expression and to interfere with bone resorption and osteoclastogenesis …”
The cholesterol-lowering drugs, statins, possess anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial and pro-osteogenic properties, and thus have been tested as an adjunct to periodontal treatment. The present systematic review aimed to answer the following focused research question: What is the effect of local and/or systemic statin use on periodontal tissues in preclinical in vivo studies of experimentally induced periodontitis (EIP) and/or acute/chronified periodontal defect (ACP) models? A literature search (of Medline/PubMed, Embase/Ovid, CENTRAL/Ovid) using the following main eligibility criteria was performed: (i) English or German language; (ii) controlled preclinical in vivo trials; (iii) local and/or systemic statin use in EIP and/or ACP models; and (iv) quantitative evaluation of periodontal tissues (i.e., alveolar bone level/amount, attachment level, cementum formation, periodontal ligament formation). Sixteen studies in EIP models and 7 studies in ACP models evaluated simvastatin, atorvastatin or rosuvastatin. Thirteen of the EIP (81%) and 2 of the ACP (29%) studies presented significantly better results in terms of alveolar bone level/amount in favor of statins. Meta-analysis based on 14 EIP trials confirmed a significant benefit of local and systemic statin use (P < .001) in terms of alveolar bone level/amount; meta-regression revealed that statin type exhibited a significant effect (P = .014) in favor of atorvastatin. Three studies reported a significantly higher periodontal attachment level in favor of statin use (P < .001). Complete periodontal regeneration was never observed; furthermore, statins did not exert any apparent effect on cementum formation. Neither local nor systemic use of statins resulted in severe adverse effects. Statin use in periodontal indications has a positive effect on periodontal tissue parameters, supporting the positive results already observed in clinical trials. Nevertheless, not all statins available have been tested so far, and further research is needed to identify the maximum effective concentration/dose and optimal carrier.
“…The increased knowledge on the inflammatory pathways involved in periodontitis has prompted the investigation of the effects of anti-inflammatory drugs as strategies to reduce gingival inflammation 16. Recent studies have suggested that cholesterol-lowering drugs such as simvastatin are protective against experimental2,4,17 and human periodontitis 18,19. These evidences have suggested that simvastatin is able to reduce bone loss and modulate the expression/release of inflammatory markers in gingival crevicular fluid samples.…”
PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of simvastatin on the synthesis of cytokines TNF-α and IL-10 and metalloproteinase (MMPs) 2 and 9 in a rat model of ligature-induced periodontitis.Materials and methodsTwenty Wistar rats were used, and a cotton ligature was place in a subgingival position encircling the entire cervix of the first molar of the left (ipsilateral) side of the mandible. The right (contralateral) side of the mandible had no ligature placed and was used as control. After the ligature placement, animals were randomly assigned to two experimental groups (n=10): 1) rats with ligature + vehicle (saline; 10 mL/kg; orally) and 2) rats with ligature + simvastatin (25 mg/kg; orally). After 14 days of treatment, the animals were euthanized by anesthetic overdose and the gingival tissue was removed and homogenized in appropriate buffer. MMP-2 and -9 release as well as the IL-10 and TNF-α levels were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Statistical comparison was performed by unpaired Student’s t-test, with p<0.05 representing significance.ResultsNo differences were observed for TNF-α production between the groups (p>0.05). However, IL-10 was upregulated in simvastatin-treated animals (1.8-fold increase) in comparison with the vehicle-treated group (p<0.05). Simvastatin reduced the gingival levels of MMP-9 (64.3%) in comparison with vehicle-treated samples (p<0.05).ConclusionOral treatment with simvastatin increased the release of IL-10 and reduced the MMP-9 in ligature-induced periodontitis model in rats.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.