(1) Background: The aim of this split-mouth design study was to analyze the clinical periodontal indexes and oxidative stress markers in gingival crevicular fluid modifications after three periodontal disease treatment possibilities (scaling and root planning—SRP; SRP and diode laser—L; SRP and photodynamic therapy—PDT). (2) Methods: The study was conducted on 52 patients: systemically healthy subjects with periodontal disease—non-RA (n = 26); and test group (n = 26) subjects with rheumatoid arthritis and periodontal disease—RA. Clinical periodontal measurements (probing depth—PD; Löe and Silness gingival index—GI; papillary bleeding index—PBI; and periodontal community index of treatment needs—CPITN) and oxidative stress markers (8-hydroxy-2’-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) and 4 hydroxynonenal (4-HNE)) were analyzed at baseline (T0), after three sessions of periodontal treatment (T1), and 6 months after treatment (T2). (3) Results: Periodontal therapy improved clinical periodontal measurements and oxidative stress markers in both analyzed groups, with supplementary benefits for laser- and PDT-treated periodontal pockets. (4) Conclusions: The analyzed oxidative stress markers decreased significantly following non-surgical periodontal therapy in both rheumatoid arthritis and systemically healthy patients. All the periodontal disease treatment possibilities analyzed in this study offered clinical and paraclinical improvements; however, the association of laser with SRP and photodisinfection with SRP yielded the best clinical and paraclinical outcomes when compared to SRP alone.

The study is aimed at assessing the impact that periodontal disease and chronic hepatitis C could have on gingival crevicular fluid levels of the NLRP3 inflammasome, caspase‐1 (CASP‐1), and interleukin‐18 (IL‐18) and at evaluating whether the increased local inflammatory reaction with clinical periodontal consequences is correlated to their upregulation. Patients were divided into four groups, according to their periodontal status and previously diagnosed hepatitis C, as follows: (i) CHC group, chronic hepatitis C patients; (ii) P group, periodontal disease patients, systemically healthy; (iii) CHC + P group, patients suffering from both conditions; and (iv) H group, systemically and periodontally healthy controls. Gingival crevicular samples were collected for quantitative analysis of the NLRP3 inflammasome, CASP‐1, and IL‐18. CHC + P patients expressed the worse periodontal status and the highest NLRP3, CASP‐1, and IL‐18 levels, the difference being statistically significant (p < 0.05). The P group patients also expressed significantly more elevated NLRP3, CASP‐1, and IL‐18 levels, as compared to nonperiodontal patients (CHC and H groups). Chronic hepatitis C and periodontal disease could have a significant influence on the upregulation of NLRP3 inflammasome and its components, possibly contributing to an increased local inflammatory reaction and clinical periodontal consequences.

Comprehensive research conducted over the past decades has shown that there is a definite connection between periodontal and systemic conditions, leading to the development and consolidation of the “periodontal medicine” concept. The 2018 classification of periodontal conditions uses this concept as a key element of the precise diagnosis of and individualized therapeutical protocols for periodontitis patients. The topic of this review is the pathogenic connections that exist between periodontal disease and metabolic/digestive tract conditions. It is important to remember that the oral cavity is a key element of the digestive tract and that any conditions affecting its integrity and function (such as periodontitis or oral cancer) can have a significant impact on the metabolic and gastrointestinal status of a patient. Thus, significant diseases with links to metabolic or digestive disruptions were chosen for inclusion in the review, such as diabetes mellitus, hepatic conditions and gastric cancers. Periodontal pathogenic mechanisms share several significant elements with these conditions, including mutual pro-inflammatory mediators, bacterial elements and genetic predisposition. Consequently, periodontal screening should be recommended for affected patients, and conversely, periodontitis patients should be considered for careful monitoring of their metabolic and digestive status.

The study assessed whether the increased production of interleukin‑1α (IL‑1α) and interleukin‑1β (IL‑1β), as a result of chronic hepatic inflammation, could be the expression of the negative impact on periodontal disease. The study included chronic periodontitis patients who were systemically healthy, chronic periodontitis patients suffering from chronic hepatitis C, as well as control patients, being systemically and periodontally healthy. After periodontal examination and the assessment of certain periodontal parameters, gingival crevicular fluid was collected from all participating patients. By using the enzyme‑linked immunosorbent assay method, a quantitative assessment of IL‑1α and IL‑1β levels was possible. The immunologic results were correlated to the clinical periodontal data. The gingival fluid levels of cytokines were higher for periodontitis patients with chronic hepatitis C than for the systemically healthy periodontitis patients (1.8‑fold higher for IL‑1α and 2.1‑fold higher for IL‑1β). In addition, the gingival fluid cytokine levels were significantly higher for the periodontal patients (with/without chronic hepatitis C) than for the control group. Positive correlations were found between gingival fluid IL‑1α and IL‑1β levels and certain clinical periodontal parameters or the age of the viral hepatitis C diagnosis, in periodontitis patients with chronic hepatitis C. The chronic hepatic inflammation may have an important additional negative impact on the periodontal status, as both inflammatory reactions seem to be promoted by common pro‑inflammatory cytokines.

This pilot split-mouth study aimed to evaluate and compare early postoperative discomfort and wound healing outcomes in post-extraction sockets after dental extraction performed with a Magnetic Mallet (MM), piezosurgery, and conventional instruments (EudraCT 2022-003135-25). Twenty-two patients requiring the extraction of three non-adjacent teeth were included. Each tooth was randomly assigned to a specific treatment (control, MM, or piezosurgery). Outcome measures were the severity of symptoms after surgery, wound healing assessed at the 10-days follow-up visit, and the time taken to complete each procedure (excluding suturing). Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests were performed to evaluate eventual differences between groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the compared methods in postoperative pain and healing, and no additional complications were reported. MM required significantly less time to perform a tooth extraction, followed by conventional instruments and piezosurgery, in increasing order (p < 0.05). Overall, the present findings suggest the use of MM and piezosurgery as valid options for dental extractions. Further randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm and extend this study’s results, facilitating the selection of the optimal method for an individual patient depending on the patient’s needs and preferences.