Lamster I B, Oshrain R L, Fiorello L A, Celenti R S, Gordon J M
Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Hackensack, New Jersey.
J Clin Periodontol. 1988 Jul;15(6):347-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1988.tb01010.x.
In previous studies, we have emphasized the importance of considering the methods used for analysis of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). This study evaluated 4 different approaches for data presentation of lysosomal enzyme activity in GCF. GCF was collected from patients displaying at least 2 mm of clinical attachment loss at a minimum of 3 sites in the mouth (DA), and patients who did not display clinical attachment loss of 2 mm or more at any site in the mouth (DI), during a 3-month interval following entry into a longitudinal trial. GCF was collected by the timed intrasulcular placement of precut filter paper strips. 16 to 28 individual GCF samples were collected from each patient. The lysosomal enzymes studied were B-glucuronidase (BG) and arylsulfatase. The mean values for the DA and DI groups at baseline and 3 months are reported. The results indicate that when the data is expressed as total enzyme activity (unit activity) per 30-s collection (UA) or UA x GCF volume (microliter) per mm of probing depth, the DA group demonstrated significantly greater mean values than the DI group at baseline and 3 months. In contrast, when the data was expressed as concentration (UA/microliter), or UA per mm of probing depth, differences between the DA and DI groups were observed only at the 3-month evaluation. The difficulty in using concentration when reporting GCF lysosomal enzyme activity is emphsized by comparison of the data from the DA group and the high and low enzyme activity subsets of the DI group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在以往的研究中,我们强调了考虑用于分析龈沟液(GCF)的方法的重要性。本研究评估了龈沟液中溶酶体酶活性数据呈现的4种不同方法。在进入一项纵向试验后的3个月期间,从口腔中至少3个部位出现至少2mm临床附着丧失的患者(DA组)以及口腔中任何部位均未出现2mm或以上临床附着丧失的患者(DI组)收集龈沟液。通过将预切滤纸条定时放置于龈沟内来收集龈沟液。从每位患者收集16至28个单独的龈沟液样本。所研究的溶酶体酶为β-葡萄糖醛酸酶(BG)和芳基硫酸酯酶。报告了DA组和DI组在基线和3个月时的平均值。结果表明,当数据表示为每30秒收集的总酶活性(单位活性)(UA)或每毫米探诊深度的UA×龈沟液体积(微升)时,DA组在基线和3个月时的平均值显著高于DI组。相比之下,当数据表示为浓度(UA/微升)或每毫米探诊深度的UA时,DA组和DI组之间的差异仅在3个月评估时观察到。通过比较DA组的数据以及DI组高酶活性和低酶活性亚组的数据,强调了在报告龈沟液溶酶体酶活性时使用浓度的困难。(摘要截短为250字)