目的:使用系统综述和荟萃分析方法分析氧化应激(OS)生物标志物在种植体周围疾病中的作用。日期:这篇综述纳入了横断面研究,随机对照试验,和病例对照试验,以评估种植体周围疾病的OS生物标志物的差异。
方法:在PubMed等电子数据库中进行了全面的文献检索,Scopus,Embase,WebofScience,和CNKI,并且在搜索过程中没有应用任何限制。
方法:共确定了452项研究,其中18人符合入选条件。使用Egger检验和漏斗图评估偏倚和敏感性分析的风险。
结果:我们发现种植体周围疾病患者种植体周围沟液(PISF)中谷胱甘肽过氧化物酶(GSH-Px)的水平显着降低(SMD=-1.40;95%CI=1.70,-1.11;p<0.001),而总髓过氧化物酶(MPO)和丙二醛(MDA)水平显着升高(SMD=0.46;95%CI=0.12,0.80;p=0.008;SMD=0.28;95%CI=0.000,0.56;p=0.043)。然而,种植体周围疾病组和对照组之间的PISF中MPO浓度(SMD=0.38;95CI=-0.39,1.15;p=0.331)和超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)(SMD=-0.43;95CI=-1.94,1.07;p=0.572)没有显着差异。同样,唾液MPO没有显示显著差异(SMD=1.62;95CI=-1.01,4.24;p=0.227).
结论:我们的结果支持局部OS生物标志物水平与种植体周围疾病密切相关。GSH-Px,总MPO和MDA可能是PISF生物标志物,具有良好的监测种植体周围疾病发展的能力。
结论:本研究发现局部OS生物标志物水平存在显着差异(GSHPx,总MPO,和MDA)在种植体周围疾病患者和健康受试者之间,这可能是预测和诊断种植体周围疾病的理想候选生物标志物。
To analyze the role of oxidative stress (OS) biomarkers in peri‑implant diseases using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. DATE: The review incorporated cross-sectional studies, randomized controlled trials, and case-control trials to evaluate the differences in OS biomarkers of peri‑implant disease.
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in electronic databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI, and no restrictions were applied during the search process.
A total of 452 studies were identified, of which 18 were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias and sensitivity analysis were assessed using Egger\'s test and funnel plots.
We found that the levels of glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) in the peri‑implant sulcus fluid (PISF) of patients with peri‑implant diseases were significantly reduced (SMD = -1.40; 95 % CI = 1.70, -1.11; p < 0.001), while the levels of total myeloperoxidase (MPO) and malondialdehyde (MDA) were significantly increased (SMD = 0.46; 95 % CI = 0.12, 0.80; p = 0.008; SMD = 0.28; 95 % CI = 0.01, 0.56; p = 0.043). However, there were no significant differences of MPO concentration (SMD = 0.38; 95 % CI = -0.39, 1.15; p = 0.331) and superoxide dismutase (SOD)(SMD = -0.43; 95 % CI = -1.94, 1.07; p = 0.572) in PISF between peri‑implant disease group and control group. Similarly, salivary MPO did not show significant differences (SMD = 1.62; 95 % CI = -1.01, 4.24; p = 0.227).
Our results supported that the level of local OS biomarkers was closely related to peri‑implant diseases. GSH-Px, total MPO and MDA may be PISF biomarkers with good capability to monitor the development of peri‑implant disease.
This study found significant differences in the levels of local OS biomarkers (GSH-Px, total MPO, and MDA) between patients with peri‑implant diseases and healthy subjects, which may be ideal candidate biomarkers for predicting and diagnosing peri‑implant diseases.