Long-term effects of tongue piercing — a case control study

The aim of this study was to evaluate tooth and periodontal damage in subjects wearing a tongue piercing (TP) in comparison to matched control subjects without tongue piercing. Members of the German Federal Armed Forces who had TP (group TP) and a matched control group (group C) volunteered to take part in the study. The time in situ, localization and material of TP were documented. Dental examinations included DMF-T, oral hygiene, enamel fissures (EF), enamel cracks (EC) and recessions. Statistical analysis was determined by χ2 test and the t test. Both groups had 46 male subjects (mean age 22.1 years). The piercings had been in situ for 3.8 ± 3.1 years. Subjects in the TP group had a total of 1,260 teeth. Twenty-nine subjects had 115 teeth (9.1%) with EF (67% lingual). In group C (1,243 teeth), 30 subjects had 60 teeth with EF (4.8%, 78% vestibular) (p < 0.01). Thirty-eight subjects belonging to group TP had EC in 186 teeth (15%). In group C, 26 subjects with 56 teeth (4.5%) were affected by EC (p < 0.001). Twenty-seven subjects in group TP had 97 teeth (7.7%) with recessions. Lingual surfaces of anterior teeth in the lower jaw were affected most frequently (74%). In group C, 8 subjects had 19 teeth (1.5%) with recessions (65% vestibular). Differences between the two groups were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Tongue piercing is correlated with an increased occurrence of enamel fissures, enamel cracks and lingual recessions. Patients need better information on the potential complications associated with tongue piercing

Initial periodontal screening and radiographic findings - A comparison of two methods to evaluate the periodontal situation

Abstract Background The periodontal screening index (PSI) is an element of the initial dental examination. The PSI provides information on the periodontal situation and allows a first estimation of the treatment required. The dental panoramic tomography (DPT) indicates the proximal bone loss, thus also allowing conclusions on the periodontal situation. In this study, the results of both methods in determining the periodontal situation are compared. Methods The clinical examination covered DMF-T, QHI, and PSI scores at four proximal sites per tooth; the examining dentist was unaware of the radiographic finding. Based on the PSI scores, the findings were diagnosed as follows: score 0 - 2 "no periodontitis", score 3 and 4 "periodontitis". Independent of the locality and time of the clinical evaluation, two dentists examined the DPTs of the subjects. The results were classified as follows: no bone loss = "no periodontitis", and bone loss = "periodontitis". Results 112 male subjects (age 18 to 58, Ø 37.7 ± 8 years) were examined. Regarding the PSI, 17 subjects were diagnosed "no periodontitis" and 95 subjects "periodontitis". According to the evaluation of the DPTs, 70 subjects were diagnosed "no periodontitis" and 42 "periodontitis". A comparison of both methods revealed that the diagnosis "no periodontitis" corresponded in 17 cases and "periodontitis" in 42 cases (53%). In 47% (53 cases) the results were not congruent. The difference between both methods was statistically significant (p Conclusion The present study shows that the initial assessment of the periodontal situation significantly depends on the method of evaluation.</p

Oral health status of patients with acute coronary syndrome – a case control study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this investigation was to assess the state of oral health of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to compare this with that of a provably healthy control group (H).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>33 patients who were receiving treatment as inpatients following acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris took part in the study (ACS-group). A healthy control group (H-group) made up of blood donors, was formed following matching for age, gender, and smoking habit with the study patient group.</p> <p>The dental investigation consisted of the dental status (DMF-T), a plaque-Index (PI), an assessment of gingival inflammation (GI) and periodontal situation (Periodontal Screening Index: PSR®/PSI), and attachment loss (AL). Statistical evaluation: t-test, Mann–Whitney-test and chi- squared test (level of significance p < 0.05).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean DMF-T of the ACS-group (18.7 ± 6.8) and the H-group (19.4 ± 5.1) showed no difference (p = 0.7). Although, in the ACS-group the average loss of teeth (M-T: 8.4 ± 5.2) was higher than in the H-group (M-T: 5.8 ± 6.6) the difference was not significant (p = 0.2). Whereas with the PI no difference between the two groups was found (p = 0.9), the ACS-group showed significantly more signs of inflammation (GI) than the H-group (p = 0.045). In the case of PSR®/PSI, there was no difference between the two groups (p = 0.7). With regard to AL, no difference was revealed between ACS- and H-group (p = 0.2).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although, the state of oral health of the ACS-group differed only insignificantly from that of control, patients with ACS showed more signs of gingival inflammation and a higher loss of teeth.</p