Lipid peroxidation (LPO) participates in the development of various diseases, including periodontitis, and malondialdehyde (MDA) is its terminal product. Therefore, in the present study, salivary and plasma MDA levels in 30 periodontitis patients were compared to those in 20 healthy controls, as well as in relation to periodontal therapy in order to assess its effectiveness. Periodontal status was assessed via plaque index, gingival index, papilla bleeding index, probing depth and clinical attachment level, while salivary and plasma MDA levels were determined by the ELISA method. The periodontitis group had a significantly greater salivary (2.99 pmol/µL) and plasma (0.50 pmol/µL) MDA levels relative to the healthy controls (1.33 pmol/µL and 0.40 pmol/µL, respectively). Three months after the periodontal therapy completion, although salivary MDA levels were significantly lower than those measured at the baseline (p < 0.001), the reduction in plasma MDA was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). These findings indicate that, while inflammatory processes in periodontium may increase local and systemic lipid peroxidation, periodontal therapy can result in a significant decrease in salivary, but not plasma, MDA levels.

Given the posited role of oxidative stress in the pathogenesis of both periodontitis and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), it may also serve as a link between these highly prevalent chronic inflammatory diseases. This view is supported by an ample body of evidence indicating that the severity and progression of periodontitis is in part driven by diabetes, while periodontal infection may hinder the attainment of adequate glycemic control in diabetic patients. Thus, this review focuses on the potential synergistic interactions along the oxidative stress–inflammation pathway characterizing both conditions. Because periodontitis and T2DM share the same risk factors and compromise patients’ quality of life, to develop effective strategies for combatting both conditions, their mutual influence needs to be explored.

Key advantages of Poly(methyl methacrylate)—PMMA for denture application are related to aesthetics and biocompatibility, while its main deficiency is related to mechanical properties. To address this issue, SiO₂ nanoparticle reinforcement was proposed, containing 0 to 5% nanosilica, to form nanocomposite materials. Flexural strengths and elastic moduli were determined and correlated to nominal nanoparticle content and zeta potential of the liquid phase nanoparticle solutions. Another issue is the biocompatibility, which was determined in terms of cytotoxicity, using L929 and MRC5 cell lines. The addition of nanoparticle was proved to be beneficial for increasing flexural strength and modulus, causing a significant increase in both strength and moduli. On the other hand, the formation of agglomerates was noted, particularly at higher nanoparticle loadings, affecting mechanical properties. The addition of nanosilica had an adverse effect on the cytotoxicity, increasing it above the level present in unmodified specimens. Cytotoxic potential was on the acceptable level for specimens with up to 2% nanosilica. Consequently, nanosilica proved to be an effective and biocompatible means of increasing the resistance of dental materials.

As oxidative stress has been implicated in the pathogenesis of diabetes mellitus and periodontitis, it may serve as a link between these conditions. Therefore, as a part of the present study, salivary lipid peroxidation (LP) in periodontitis patients with and without diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) was evaluated, along with the periodontal therapy effectiveness. The study sample comprised of 71 DM2 patients with periodontitis and 31 systemically healthy controls suffering from periodontitis of comparable severity. In all participants, periodontal indices—plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), papilla bleeding index (PBI), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment level (CAL)—were recorded, and salivary LP was measured using a spectrophotometric method prior to treatment initiation and three months post-treatment. At baseline, mean salivary LP in DM2 patients was higher than that measured for the control group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05), whereas a positive significant correlation was found between PPD and LP in both groups. Three months after nonsurgical periodontal therapy, clinical periodontal parameters and salivary LP levels were significantly reduced in both groups (p < 0.05). These findings indicate that the improvement in clinical periodontal status following nonsurgical periodontal therapy is accompanied by a significant decrease in salivary LP in DM2 patients, suggesting that periodontitis, rather than diabetes, is the primary driver of the elevated salivary LP in this group.

Antioxidant capacity is frequently measured by evaluating superoxide dismutase (SOD) concentration in body fluids. The aim of this study was to compare SOD concentrations in the saliva and plasma of patients with periodontitis to those measured in a group of patients with healthy periodontium, as well as to evaluate the influence of nonsurgical periodontal therapy on salivary and plasma SOD in periodontitis patients. For this purpose, 40 systemically healthy patients aged 30–70 years who had at least 20 teeth were recruited, 20 of whom had periodontitis, and 20 served as healthy periodontitis-free controls. In all participants, periodontal status was assessed via the plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), papilla bleeding index (PIB), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL), and the SOD concentration in both saliva and plasma was determined by conducting a commercial immunoenzymatic ELISA test. In periodontitis patients, periodontal indices and saliva and blood samples were taken at the beginning of the study, as well as 3 months after periodontal therapy, while in the control group, these data were gathered at the beginning of the study only. SOD values in the saliva of patients with periodontitis (0.244 U/µL) were statistically significantly higher compared with patients with healthy periodontium (0.017 U/µL). Moreover, periodontal therapy led to a statistically significant decrease in this marker in the saliva of patients with periodontitis (p = 0.023), which was comparable with that measured in the control group. On the other hand, no statistically significant differences were noted in plasma SOD values either between the two groups or at follow-up compared with baseline in the group with periodontitis. These findings suggest that the elevated salivary SOD in patients with periodontal disease may represent a mechanism of tissue protection against oxidative stress that occurs in response to periodontal disease.

Introduction. Diabetes mellitus as a complex metabolic disease influences functioning of numerous organs. Chronic periodontitis is one of frequent diabetic complications. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effects of non?surgical periodontal therapy between diabetes mellitus type 2 patients (DM type 2) and non?diabetic individuals (control group). Methods. Our study included 41 DM type 2 subjects and 21 non?diabetic individuals, all of them with chronic periodontitis. The diabetic group was divided into two subgroups based on the level of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as follows: D1 - 18 subjects with good metabolic control (HbA1c<7%), and D2 - 23 subjects with poor metabolic (HbA1c?7%). State of oral hygiene and periodontal clinical parameters of subjects, such as: plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), papilla bleeding index (PBI), probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), were evaluated at the baseline and 3 months after scaling and root?planning. Results. ANOVA test showed that there was no statistically significant difference of treatment success between studied groups in relation to GI (p=0.52), PBI (p=0.36) and CAL (p=0.11). Reduction of PI and PPD in the control group (?PI=0.84; ?PPD=0.35 mm) was significantly higher (p<0.05) than the reduction of PI and PPD in patients with the diabetes (group D1 ?PI=0.60, ?PPD=0.11 mm; group D2 ?PI=0.53, ?PPD=0.11 mm). Conclusion. Although there were differences in treatment success between DM subjects and non?diabetic individuals, they were not significant for the most measured parameters. The results of this study did not absolutely support the assumption that the level of glycemic control significantly affected the periodontal therapy outcome in diabetics.