First Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, 37A Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beiing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Third Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Eur J Med Res. 2024 Nov 2;29(1):527. doi: 10.1186/s40001-024-02111-z.
Research investigating the potential link between gingival microvascular blood flow and inflammatory status is scarce. This study aims to assess color doppler flow imaging (CDFI) and micro-flow imaging (MFI) as tools for the assessment of gingival papilla blood flow (GPBF) and to examine their diagnostic utility as a noninvasive means of detecting gingival bleeding.
CDFI and MFI were used to assess the GPBF grade (0-4) of 140 anterior gingival papilla sites in advanced periodontitis patients. Correlations between GPBF grades and periodontal characteristics were examined, and diagnostic performance as a means of predicting bleeding on probing (BOP) was examined using receiver operating characteristic curves.
GPBF grades 0 and 1 assessed by the MFI were 14.29% and 15.71% respectively, lower than the 28.57% and 24.29% assessed by the CDFI. In contrast, MFI detected a higher frequency of GPBF grade 2 sites (40.71%) relative to CDFI (22.14%). The CDFI and MFI provided consistent results in 62.14% of the sites, while the MFI demonstrated higher ratings in rest 37.86% of the sites. A significant positive correlation was detected between GPBF grade and the modified gingival index (MGI), bleeding index (BI), BOP, and probing depth (PD). It showed high accuracy for CDFI or MFI to diagnosing BOP with a sensitivity of 80.51% and 96.43% and a specificity of 77.27% and 57.14%, respectively. Area under the receiver operator characteristic curve values when predicting BOP based on the GPBF grade determined using CDFI and MFI approaches 0.887 (95% CI 0.833-0.942) and 0.917 (95% CI 0.862-0.972), respectively, and there were no significant differences between these values (Z = - 1.502, p = 0.133).
Both MFI and CDFI can be employed for the evaluation of GPBF, and MFI is better suited to detecting mild inflammation. Trial registration ChiCTR2200066021 (Date of registration: 22/11/2022).
研究牙龈微血管血流与炎症状态之间潜在联系的文献很少。本研究旨在评估彩色多普勒血流成像（CDFI）和微血流成像（MFI）作为评估牙龈乳头血流（GPBF）的工具，并研究其作为检测牙龈出血的非侵入性手段的诊断效用。
使用 CDFI 和 MFI 评估牙周炎患者 140 个前牙龈乳头部位的 GPBF 等级（0-4）。检查 GPBF 等级与牙周特征之间的相关性，并使用接收者操作特征曲线检查作为探测出血（BOP）预测的诊断性能。
MFI 评估的 GPBF 等级 0 和 1 分别为 14.29%和 15.71%，低于 CDFI 评估的 28.57%和 24.29%。相比之下，MFI 检测到 GPBF 等级 2 部位的频率更高（40.71%），而 CDFI 则为 22.14%。CDFI 和 MFI 在 62.14%的部位提供了一致的结果，而 MFI 在其余 37.86%的部位则显示了更高的评分。GPBF 等级与改良牙龈指数（MGI）、出血指数（BI）、BOP 和探诊深度（PD）之间存在显著正相关。CDFI 或 MFI 对 BOP 的诊断具有较高的准确性，其灵敏度分别为 80.51%和 96.43%，特异性分别为 77.27%和 57.14%。基于 CDFI 和 MFI 方法确定的 GPBF 等级预测 BOP 的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为 0.887（95%置信区间 0.833-0.942）和 0.917（95%置信区间 0.862-0.972），这些值之间没有显著差异（Z=-1.502，p=0.133）。
MFI 和 CDFI 均可用于评估 GPBF，MFI 更适合检测轻度炎症。
ChiCTR2200066021（注册日期：2022 年 11 月 22 日）。
