Efficacy of Probiotics Versus Tetracycline Fibers as Adjuvants to Scaling and Root Planing on Interleukin 1β Levels in Type 2 Diabetic Patients With Periodontitis: A Clinical and Biochemical Study.

Background Periodontitis, a chronic inflammatory disease, is triggered by the plaque biofilm culminating in periodontal attachment loss, bone loss, and tooth loss. Diabetes, a globally prevalent disease, causes an increased inflammatory response to the microflora associated with periodontitis. It has been observed that the link between these two diseases is bidirectional. Tissue repair is impaired in diabetic patients with periodontitis. Local drug delivery systems selectively target the inflamed sites contrary to systemic antibiotics which lead to resistance and many other adverse effects. Probiotics aid in the growth of beneficial microorganisms and have immunomodulatory effects on the host. Tetracyclines have anti-collagenase properties and reduce the bacterial load, curbing the progression of periodontitis. Interleukin (IL) 1β, a strong marker of periodontal tissue destruction, plays a pivotal role in inflammation, immune regulation, and bone resorption in periodontitis. This study evaluated and compared the benefits of probiotics and tetracycline fibers when used as adjunctive tools after scaling and root planing (SRP) on IL1β levels in type 2 diabetic patients with periodontitis. Methodology A total of 36 patients participated in this study. Group I included 12 patients with periodontitis and uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c levels >7). After SRP, six patients received tetracycline fibers (IA), and six patients received probiotics (1B) as locally delivered agents. Group II included 12 patients with periodontitis and diabetes under control (HbA1c levels 6-7%). After SRP, six patients received tetracycline fibers (IIA), and six patients received probiotics (IIB) as locally delivered drugs (test groups). Group III, the control group, included 12 patients with periodontitis only, wherein a placebo was used as a local drug delivery (LDD) after SRP. The clinical parameters, such as plaque index, gingival index, and probing pocket depth, were recorded preoperatively and at eight and 12 weeks after non-surgical periodontal therapy. IL1β levels were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at baseline and six weeks after SRP. Results On intra and intergroup comparison, all groups showed improvement in both the clinical and biochemical parameters but significant results were seen in Group IIA (p < 0.01) when compared to the other groups. Conclusions Group II (well-controlled diabetics) performed significantly better than the other groups, which was followed by Group III. The use of LDDs as adjunctive tools after SRP was not beneficial in Group I (uncontrolled diabetics).