Oral health status of patients with acute coronary syndrome - a case control study

2012 | journal article; research paper. A publication with affiliation to the University of Göttingen.

Jump to: Cite & Linked | Documents & Media | Details | Version history

Cite this publication

​Oral health status of patients with acute coronary syndrome - a case control study​
Ziebolz, D.; Priegnitz, A.; Hasenfuß, G. ; Helms, H.-J.; Hornecker, E. & Mausberg, R. F. ​ (2012) 
BMC Oral Health12 art. 17​.​ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-17 

Documents & Media

1472-6831-12-17.pdf236.89 kBAdobe PDF

License

Published Version

Attribution 2.0 CC BY 2.0

Details

Authors
Ziebolz, Dirk; Priegnitz, Andrea; Hasenfuß, Gerd ; Helms, Hans-Joachim; Hornecker, Else; Mausberg, Rainer F. 
Abstract
Background: The aim of this investigation was to assess the state of oral health of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to compare this with that of a provably healthy control group (H). Methods: 33 patients who were receiving treatment as inpatients following acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris took part in the study (ACS-group). A healthy control group (H-group) made up of blood donors, was formed following matching for age, gender, and smoking habit with the study patient group. The dental investigation consisted of the dental status (DMF-T), a plaque-Index (PI), an assessment of gingival inflammation (GI) and periodontal situation (Periodontal Screening Index: PSR (R)/PSI), and attachment loss (AL). Statistical evaluation: t-test, Mann-Whitney-test and chi-squared test (level of significance p < 0.05). Results: The mean DMF-T of the ACS-group (18.7 +/- 6.8) and the H-group (19.4 +/- 5.1) showed no difference (p = 0.7). Although, in the ACS-group the average loss of teeth (M-T: 8.4 +/- 5.2) was higher than in the H-group (M-T: 5.8 +/- 6.6) the difference was not significant (p = 0.2). Whereas with the PI no difference between the two groups was found (p = 0.9), the ACS-group showed significantly more signs of inflammation (GI) than the H-group (p = 0.045). In the case of PSR (R)/PSI, there was no difference between the two groups (p = 0.7). With regard to AL, no difference was revealed between ACS- and H-group (p = 0.2). Conclusion: Although, the state of oral health of the ACS-group differed only insignificantly from that of control, patients with ACS showed more signs of gingival inflammation and a higher loss of teeth.
Issue Date
2012
Publisher
Biomed Central Ltd
Journal
BMC Oral Health 
ISSN
1472-6831
Sponsor
Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2012

Reference

Citations


Social Media