Search

Aim A clear relationship between tongue coating and oral malodour has been observed in many clinical trials. Why or when this coating is formed remains an open question. The aim of this study was to analyse possible factors related to the presence of tongue coating in a population complaining from oral malodour. Materials and Methods Patients were recruited from a halitosis clinic ( UZ Leuven). Medical history, dietary and oral hygiene habits were retrieved via a questionnaire. Data were recorded on organoleptic score and level of sulphur compounds in breath, anatomical features of the tongue dorsum, amount of tongue coating (according to three indices: Miyazaki, Winkel and modified Winkel), tongue coating wet weight and salivary flow. The correlation between the presence of tongue coating and a series of parameters was analysed. Results The level of oral hygiene was the strongest determinant factor for the presence of tongue coating. Smoking, presence of a denture, periodontal status and dietary habits also correlated although less obvious. Conclusion The presence of tongue coating appears to be related to several factors of which oral hygiene is the strongest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim This 3-year prospective randomized controlled trial compared the clinical, microbiological and biochemical outcome of minimally (Turned, Tur) and moderately rough (TiUnite®, TiU) implant surfaces in a split-mouth design. Material and methods The study population included 14 subjects: nine fully edentulous and five partially edentulous subjects with a history of periodontitis. Implants ( n = 78, 39 Tur and 39 TiU) were installed randomly in each patient. Peri-implant clinical parameters and intra-oral radiographs were recorded after 3 years of loading. Subgingival plaque and peri-implant crevicular fluid samples were collected and analysed using culture and quantitative polymerase chain reaction for the biofilm, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the concentration of osteoprotegerin and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand, respectively. Results No statistically significant differences in clinical, microbiological and biochemical parameters could be observed when comparing the Tur and TiU implant surfaces. Conclusion After 3 years of loading, in periodontitis susceptible patients, the moderately rough, TiU implants demonstrated a similar clinical outcome compared with the smoother, turned implants. Longer follow-up and studies using different implant types are needed to confirm the statement that minimally and moderately rough implant surfaces perform similar, both from a clinical and from a microbiological point of view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]