Genco R J, Slots J
J Dent Res. 1984 Mar;63(3):441-51. doi: 10.1177/00220345840630031601.
Great progress has been made in our understanding of the pathogenesis of periodontal disease, the primary role of bacteria as etiologic agents, and the critical modifying role of host responses. It is useful to consider several stages in the pathogenesis of periodontal disease - (a) colonization, (b) invasion, (c) destruction, and (d) healing - and to place into perspective the various host responses as they may affect each of these four stages (Table 5). With respect to colonization, although very little direct evidence is available, it is reasonable to suggest that antibodies, either secretory or serum-derived, acting by virtue of their ability to block attachment, could inhibit colonization by immune reduction of adherence mechanisms. With respect to invasion of the tissue, it appears that phagocytes, particularly the neutrophils, are important, acting in concert with opsonic antibody and complement in ingesting and killing the periodontal microflora before or during the early invasive process. A major advance in our understanding of the pathogenesis of periodontal diseases is the realization that the virulence of periodontopathic bacteria relates to their leukaggressive properties, allowing them to evade neutrophil protective mechanisms. Invasion of the periodontal tissues by bacterial products may be inhibited by the complexing of these products with antibody with the formation of antigen-antibody complexes that are phagocytosed and digested, particularly by scavenger phagocytes such as the macrophage. With respect to the destructive phase of periodontal disease, it is clear that the direct effect of lymphocytes mediated either through direct cytotoxic activity, or through biologically-active destructive lymphokines (such as alpha-lymphotoxin and osteoclast activating factor), can lead to tissue destruction. Macrophages, through the production of monokines, collagenase, and reactive oxygen species, can also lead to tissue destruction. The direct effects of bacterial toxins or enzymes which can lead to tissue destruction can be inhibited by complexing with antitoxic or enzyme-neutralizing antibodies. With respect to healing and fibrosis, very little direct information is available; however, it is possible that the lymphocytes and macrophages affect fibrosis by the production of chemotactic factors for fibroblasts which would be expected to bring them to the area of periodontal inflammation and also by production of fibroblast-activating factors, which then cause the fibroblasts to proliferate and produce collagen which replaces lost collagen or results in fibrosis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
在我们对牙周病发病机制、细菌作为病因的主要作用以及宿主反应的关键调节作用的理解方面已经取得了巨大进展。考虑牙周病发病机制的几个阶段是有用的——(a)定植,(b)侵袭,(c)破坏,以及(d)愈合——并正确看待各种宿主反应,因为它们可能影响这四个阶段中的每一个阶段(表5)。关于定植,虽然几乎没有直接证据,但合理的推测是,分泌型或血清来源的抗体凭借其阻断附着的能力,可通过免疫降低黏附机制来抑制定植。关于组织侵袭,似乎吞噬细胞,特别是中性粒细胞很重要,它们在早期侵袭过程之前或期间与调理素抗体和补体协同作用,摄取并杀死牙周微生物群。我们对牙周病发病机制理解的一个重大进展是认识到牙周病原菌的毒力与其侵袭白细胞的特性有关,使它们能够逃避中性粒细胞的保护机制。细菌产物对牙周组织的侵袭可能会被这些产物与抗体形成抗原 - 抗体复合物所抑制,这些复合物会被吞噬并消化,特别是被巨噬细胞等清道夫吞噬细胞。关于牙周病的破坏阶段,很明显淋巴细胞通过直接细胞毒性活性或通过生物活性破坏淋巴因子(如α - 淋巴毒素和破骨细胞激活因子)介导的直接作用可导致组织破坏。巨噬细胞通过产生单核因子、胶原酶和活性氧也可导致组织破坏。细菌毒素或酶导致组织破坏的直接作用可通过与抗毒素或酶中和抗体结合而受到抑制。关于愈合和纤维化,几乎没有直接信息;然而,淋巴细胞和巨噬细胞有可能通过产生吸引成纤维细胞的趋化因子来影响纤维化,预期这些趋化因子会将成纤维细胞带到牙周炎症区域,还可通过产生成纤维细胞激活因子,然后导致成纤维细胞增殖并产生胶原蛋白,从而替代丢失的胶原蛋白或导致纤维化。(摘要截断于400字)