Background: Active smoking is recognized as a major risk factor for oral and systemic inflammatory disorders. Tobacco smoke can alter immune responses and modulate the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, potentially contributing to periodontal tissue damage and impaired oral health. Salivary biomarkers represent a non-invasive and clinically accessible approach for monitoring inflammatory processes. The present study aimed to evaluate salivary levels of interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and interleukin-8 (IL-8) in active smokers and non-smokers and to explore their potential relevance as indicators of oral inflammatory status. Methods: A total of 98 clinically healthy adults aged 20–72 years were included in this cross-sectional study. Participants were divided into four groups according to smoking status and sex: female controls, male controls, female smokers, and male smokers. Unstimulated saliva samples were collected using standardized procedures and analyzed for IL-2, IL-6, and IL-8 concentrations using commercially available ELISA kits. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results: Salivary cytokine profiles differed between smokers and non-smokers across all investigated biomarkers. Female smokers exhibited lower mean IL-8 levels than female controls, whereas male smokers showed slightly lower IL-8 concentrations than male controls. IL-6 concentrations tended to be higher in female smokers and lower in male smokers relative to their respective control groups. Similarly, IL-2 levels displayed modest variations between smokers and non-smokers. However, none of the observed differences were statistically significant (p > 0.05). A significant positive correlation was identified between salivary IL-2 and IL-6 concentrations (r = 0.559, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Although statistically significant differences were not identified, the observed trends suggest that active smoking may influence salivary cytokine profiles associated with oral inflammatory responses. Salivary IL-2, IL-6, and IL-8 remain promising biomarkers for the non-invasive assessment of inflammatory status and warrant further investigation in larger cohorts. Future studies incorporating additional clinical and periodontal parameters are needed to clarify the relationship between smoking-related immune modulation and oral inflammatory processes.

Background/Objectives: Periodontitis and peri-implantitis are inflammatory conditions associated with progressive loss of supporting bone, but they differ in tissue architecture, biological response, and disease progression. Conventional radiographic assessment often reports bone loss as a global value, which may overlook site-specific mesial–distal differences. This study aimed to compare mesial and distal radiographic bone loss around natural teeth affected by periodontitis and dental implants affected by peri-implantitis, with a focus on quadrant 1. Methods: This retrospective comparative CBCT-based radiographic study analyzed 128 within-patient paired tooth/implant observations in quadrant 1. Mesial and distal bone loss values were recorded separately for natural teeth and corresponding implant sites. Each pair included one natural-tooth site and one implant site from the same patient, matched by comparable anatomical position and surface. Paired-samples t-tests were used, and mean differences were calculated as implants minus natural teeth. Given the multiple site-specific comparisons, p-values were interpreted as unadjusted exploratory findings. Results: Statistically significant differences were observed only on the mesial surface of anterior implants. Mesial bone loss was significantly greater around implants than natural teeth for central incisors (8.30 ± 3.31 mm vs. 4.90 ± 1.78 mm; mean difference = 3.39 mm; p = 0.004), lateral incisors (8.12 ± 3.57 mm vs. 4.94 ± 2.82 mm; mean difference = 3.18 mm; p = 0.028), and canines (5.99 ± 3.12 mm vs. 4.42 ± 1.26 mm; mean difference = 1.57 mm; p = 0.018). No statistically significant differences were observed for distal surfaces or posterior tooth/implant positions. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this quadrant-specific retrospective radiographic analysis, peri-implant bone loss showed a surface- and position-dependent distribution, with greater mesial bone loss around anterior implants. Separate mesial and distal assessment may provide additional value for periodontal and peri-implant monitoring.