Keywords chronic periodontitis -
Helicobacter pylori
- subgingival plaque - stomach - meta-analysis
Introduction
Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori ) is a gram-negative, spiral (S-shaped), microaerophilic organism that colonizes the
gastric mucosa.[1 ] It is the leading cause of gastritis, peptic ulcer and gastric cancer,[1 ]
[2 ] mainly transmitted through the oral–oral[3 ] or fecal–oral routes.[3 ]
[4 ] Although the global prevalence of H. pylori infection is more than 50%,[5 ]
[6 ] higher rates are observed in developing countries (51%) compared with developed
ones (35%).[7 ]
H. pylori infection has been associated with several systemic diseases, such as iron deficiency
anemia,[8 ] cardiovascular disease,[9 ]
[10 ]
[11 ]
[12 ] type 2 diabetes,[13 ]
[14 ] and pregnancy complications.[15 ] The diagnosis of H. pylori infection is set by the urea breath test (UBT), stool antigen test (SAT), serology,
endoscopy, rapid urease test (RUT), histology, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
Each of these methods carries advantages and disadvantages.[16 ]
Periodontitis is an inflammatory disease of the supporting dental tissues whose manifestation
and development are determined by the nature of the immune response to bacterial biofilms.
The latter are typically composed of gram-negative microorganisms adhering to the
hard dental surfaces, known as dental plaque.[17 ]
[18 ]
[19 ] In the advanced form of the disease, destruction of the alveolar bone is caused,
which leads to the formation of periodontal pockets and retraction of the gums.[17 ]
[20 ] The prevalence of periodontitis is high, ranging from 20 to 50% worldwide.[21 ] Periodontal disease has been associated with a variety of chronic diseases, such
as cardiovascular disease,[20 ]
[21 ] diabetes,[22 ] and pregnancy complications.[23 ]
Research efforts focus on understanding the mechanisms of periodontal diseases. Traditional
detection methods are insufficient in detecting nonculturable microbial species. On
the contrary, metagenomic technology, as it is not based on microbial cultivation
but on analysis of the functional genes of the microbial communities, interprets the
microbial diversity, the synthesis of metabolic pathways, and the interaction between
microorganisms and the environment.[24 ]
[25 ] Metagenomics studies microbial genetic material directly from environmental samples
by sequence analysis.[26 ] This approach might lead to the detection of new and specific periopathogenic bacterial
species and clarify the differences between symbiotic and dysbiotic biofilm. The latter
is important for understanding the molecular mechanisms of the onset and progression
of periodontitis and for providing targeted treatment.[25 ]
The common features of H. pylori infection and periodontitis (inflammatory response, association with chronic diseases),[27 ] as well as the transmission of H. pylori through the oral route, led the researchers to investigate colonies in areas within
the oral cavity in patients with chronic periodontitis. At the same time, an association
has been established between periodontitis and H. pylori infection, suggesting that the oral cavity is a potential reservoir of H. pylori .[28 ]
[29 ] In interventional studies, successful eradication of gastric H. pylori resulted in improved periodontal disease.[30 ]
[31 ]
As the studies published so far have been focused on the supragingival plaque or patients
with periodontal diseases in general (including gingivitis), the present systematic
review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association of H. pylori infection in the stomach and/or in specific oral cavity areas (subgingival plaque,
and gingival crevicular fluid) with chronic periodontitis.
Methods
Protocol and Registration
The protocol was created according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement and registered to the International
prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) database (Record ID: CRD 42021229036).
Data Sources
A comprehensive search was performed in three electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed,
Scopus, Cochrane Controlled register of Trials) from conception until January 1st,
2021. Manual searching was performed on Google and Google Scholar. Gray literature
was assessed via opengrey.eu, applying the search terms “chronic periodontitis” and
“H. pylori .” The search strategy in MEDLINE is presented in [Table 1 ].[32 ]
Table 1
Search strategy in MEDLINE
Search
Query
#1
((((((((((((generalized periodontitis) OR (chronic periodontal inflammation)) OR (periodontitis))
OR (chronic periodontitis)) OR (mild periodontal disease)) OR (moderate periodontal
disease)) OR (advanced periodontal disease)) OR (severe periodontal disease)) OR (periodontal
disease)) OR (CP)) OR (periodontal disease[MeSH Terms])) OR (periodontitis[MeSH Terms]))
OR (chronic periodontitis[MeSH Terms])
#2
(((((Helicobacter pylori) OR (H. pylori)) OR (H pylori)) OR (Campylobacter pylori))
OR (helicobacter pylori[MeSH Terms])) AND (((((((((((((((deep periodontal lesion)
OR (pocket with deep probing depth*)) OR (site with deep probing depth*)) OR (pocket
with probing depth* >5mm)) OR (pocket with probing depth* 6mm)) OR (site with probing
depth* >5mm)) OR (site with probing depth* 6mm)) OR (dental plaque)) OR (subgingival
plaque)) OR (periodontal pocket)) OR (gingival crevicular fluid)) OR (GCF)) OR (dental
plaque[MeSH Terms])) OR (periodontal pocket[MeSH Terms])) OR (gingival crevicular
fluid[MeSH Terms]))
#3
(((((Helicobacter pylori) OR (H Pylori)) OR (H. Pylori)) OR (Campylobacter pylori))
OR (helicobacter pylori[MeSH Terms])) AND (((((((((((stomach) OR (gastric)) OR (gastric
mucosa)) OR (stomach antrum)) OR (pylorus)) OR (gastric epithelium)) OR (pyloric antrum))
OR (stomach[MeSH Terms])) OR (gastric mucosa[MeSH Terms])) OR (pyloric antrum[MeSH
Terms])) OR (pylorus[MeSH Terms]))
#4
#2 OR #3
#5
#1 AND #4
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
The studies were considered eligible if they (i) were randomized controlled trials
and of observational type (cohort, cross-sectional, case-control) studies, (ii) were
approved by ethics committees, (iii) were written in English, (iv) reported relevant
data on two study arms [(a) patients with chronic periodontitis, (b) healthy controls],
and (v) had adopted specific criteria for the definition of chronic periodontitis.
The diagnosis of chronic periodontitis had to be based on clinical or/and radiographic
criteria, according to the 1999 classification system[33 ] or the 1989 classification system.[34 ] The studies were excluded if they (i) were of a low level of evidence (case-reports,
case-series), (ii) included non-adult populations, and (iii) referred to specific
conditions, namely pregnancy, orthodontic treatment, systemic diseases, malignancies,
diabetes mellitus, auto-immune diseases, chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs, antibiotics, proton pump inhibitors and bismuth salts use during the last two
months, periodontal treatment (scaling, root planning) during the last six months,
history of H. pylori eradication, gastrectomy, and less than 20 remaining teeth.
Study Records
Citations exported by the electronic databases in compatible file versions were imported
to the Mendeley platform for managing study records. After removing the duplications,
the records were exported to the Rayyan platform.[35 ] After reading the title and abstract, two reviewers (AG, IT) decided independently
about the study eligibility. In relevant studies, the full text was assessed by two
reviewers (AG, IT) independently. Conflicts were solved by a third reviewer (AT).
Data Extraction
A Microsoft Excel sheet was used for data extraction. Study identification data (name
of the first author, year of publication, country) and population data (age, gender,
sample size) were recorded. Regarding chronic periodontitis, the number of cases and
controls were recorded. Regarding H. pylori infection, the number of positive and negative subjects (among total sample and cases
with chronic periodontitis), diagnostic methods (histology, culture, rapid urease
test [RUT], urea breath test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, polymerase chain
reaction [PCR], stool antigen test), and areas in which H. pylori was assessed (stomach, gingival crevicular fluid, subgingival plaque, periodontal
pocket) were recorded. Data were extracted by two reviewers (AG, IT) independently.
Conflicts were solved by a third reviewer (AT).
Outcomes
The outcome of the systematic review was the prevalence of H. pylori in chronic periodontitis and healthy control arms. The prevalence of H. pylori in the stomach and/or in specific oral cavity areas (gingival crevicular fluid, subgingival
plaque) was recorded where available.
Bias Assessment and Confidence
The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was applied to assess the quality of observational
studies.[36 ] Based on the collected quality stars, selection, comparability, and exposure (case-control
studies)/outcome (cohort and cross-sectional studies) bias were evaluated as “low”,
“high” or “unclear” by two reviewers (AG, IT) independently. Conflicts were solved
by a third reviewer (AT).
The Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) tool
was applied to assess the strength of the evidence.[37 ] Two reviewers (AG, IT) independently evaluated the evidence of the included studies
as “high,” “moderate,” “low,” or “very low.” Conflicts were solved by a third reviewer
(AT).
Statistical Analysis
The meta-analysis of the included studies was made by the Review Manager (RevMan)
5.4 software. The effect measure of the outcome (presence of H. pylori —binary) was odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For the quantitative
synthesis, a random-effects model (inverse variance) was applied. Heterogeneity was
assessed by chi-square and I2 . Subgroup analyses were performed based on the diagnostic method of H. pylori and the oral cavity area of H. pylori infection.
Results
The literature search located 1723 studies. After duplicate removal, 1600 studies
were assessed based on the title and abstract. Of them, 66 studies were examined as
full-text articles, and 13 were included in the qualitative synthesis (PRISMA flowchart—[Fig. 1 ]). The reasons for exclusion are presented in [Table 2 ]. Four studies[38 ]
[39 ]
[40 ]
[41 ] were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis), as nine were excluded
for an unclear definition of chronic periodontitis or violated the rule of independent
observations in samples.
Table 2
List of excluded studies with rationale
Number
Study
Reason for exclusion
1
Al Asqah, 2019
No full-text available
2
Badea, 2002
No full-text available
3
Bielanski, 1999
No full-text available
4
Bussac, 1999
No full-text available
5
Esfahanizadeh, 2010
No full-text available
6
Safarov, 2002
No full-text available
7
Wei, 2020
No full-text available
8
Azzi, 2017
Not appropriate study type
9
Paladino, 2015
Not appropriate study type
10
Payão, 2016
Not appropriate study type
11
Ronellenfitsch, 2016
Not appropriate study type
12
Sujatha et al 2015[58 ]
Not appropriate study type
13
Watts, 2006
Not appropriate study type
14
Al Refai, 2002
No approval by an ethics committee
15
Asikainen et al 1994[46 ]
No approval by an ethics committee
16
Dye et al 2002[42 ]
No approval by an ethics committee
17
Gao, 2011
No approval by an ethics committee
18
Gebara, 2004
No approval by an ethics committee
19
Gebara, 2006
No approval by an ethics committee
20
Riggio and Lennon 1999[44 ]
No approval by an ethics committee
21
YanSong, 2014
No approval by an ethics committee
22
Zheng, 2015
No approval by an ethics committee
23
Adachi, 2019
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
24
Alagl, 2019
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
25
Anand et al 2006[56 ]
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
26
Bago, 2011
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
27
Berroteran, 2002
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
28
Bharath, 2014
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
29
Boylan, 2014
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
30
Choudhury, 2003
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
31
Contractor, 1998
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
32
Czesnikiewicz-Guzik, 2005
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
33
Ding, 2015
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
34
Dowsett, 1999
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
35
Gülseren, 2016
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
36
Karczewska, 2002
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
37
Liu, 2009
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
38
Medina, 2010
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
39
Namiot, 2006
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
40
Rajendran, 2009
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
41
Salazar, 2012
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
42
Schwahn, 2018
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
43
Teoman, 2007
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
44
Tongtawee et al 2019[30 ]
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
45
Tsami, 2011
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
46
Zahedi, 2017
Absence of chronic periodontitis study group
47
Bürgers, 2008
Absence of good general health/medical status in the population
48
Flores-Treviño, 2019
Absence of good general health/medical status in the population
49
Hardo et al 1995[47 ]
Absence of good general health/medical status in the population
50
Yang, 2016
Absence of good general health/medical status in the population
51
Bali, 2010
No predefined position of oral Helicobacter pylori
52
Suzuki, 2008
No predefined position of oral H. pylori
53
Umeda, 2003
No predefined position of oral H. pylori
Fig. 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flowchart.
The summary of the characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis is presented
in [Table 3 ]. The characteristics of excluded studies are presented in [Tables 4 ], [5 ], and [6 ].
Table 3
Summary of studies included in the meta-analysis
Study
First author
Al Asqah et al[38 ]
Nisha et al[39 ]
Salehi et al[40 ]
Silva et al[41 ]
Year
2009
2016
2013
2010
Country
Saudi Arabia
India
Iran
Brazil
Population
Sex (M/F)
56/45
239/261
42/58
47/68
Age (y)
Mean (SD):
40.77 (14.15)
Range, 18–60
Mean (SD):
35.3 (10.6)
Mean (SD):
49.6 (5.8)
Sample size
101
500
100
115
Chronic periodontitis
Cases
62
293
50
62
Controls
39
207
50
53
Definition
Bleeding on probing and at least four teeth with a probing depth ≥3 mm
One or more sites with a probing depth ≥4 mm and clinical attachment loss ≥4 mm at
the same site
3 mm clinical attachment loss within at least four teeth and more than 10% of sites
with bleeding on probing
At least four different teeth with periodontal pockets ≥5 mm and clinical attachment
level >3 mm
Oral Helicobacter
pylori
Positive
66
270
21
0
Negative
35
230
79
115
Chronic periodontitis-H. pylori positive
49
180
9
0
Chronic periodontitis-H. pylori negative
13
113
41
62
Detection method
RUT
RUT
PCR
PCR
Exact location
Subgingival plaque
Subgingival plaque
GCF
Subgingival plaque
H. pylori in the stomach
Positive
50
345
N/A
N/A
Negative
51
155
N/A
N/A
Chronic periodontitis-H. pylori positive
37
209
N/A
N/A
Chronic periodontitis-H. pylori negative
25
84
N/A
N/A
Detection method
RUT
Serology
N/A
Histology and PCR
Abbreviations: GCF, gingival crevicular fluid; N/A, not available; PCR, polymerase
chain reaction; RUT, rapid urease test; SD, standard deviation.
Table 4
Summary of demographic characteristics and chronic periodontitis status in studies
excluded from the meta-analysis
Sl. No.
Study
Population
Chronic periodontitis
First author
Year
Country
Sex (M/F)
Age (y)
Sample size
Cases
Controls
Definition
1
Agarwal
2012
India
28/22
Range: 30–65
50
50
0
N/A
2
Eskandari
2010
Iran
31/36
Mean (SD): 42.3 (12.52)
67
67
0
Periodontal pocket with a depth ≥4 mm and bleeding on probing
3
Gonçalves
2009
Brazil
13/18
≥ 21
31
17
14
At least three sites with
probing depth ≥ 5 mm and/or clinical attachment level ≥ 4 mm and bleeding on probing
4
Hu
2016
China
14/0
Range: 18–60
28 samples/14 subjects
14
0
American Academy of Periodontology
More than 30% of sites with probing depth deeper than 4 mm, more than 30% of sites
with attachment loss of 2 mm
5
Kadota
2020
Japan
13/26
Mean (SD): 35.3(15.1)
39
16
23
Periodontal depth ≥4 mm at third molars
6
Souto
2008
Brazil
N/A
N/A
225
169
56
≥10% of teeth with probing depth and/or clinical attachment loss ≥5 mm, or ≥15% of
teeth with
the periodontal depth and/or clinical attachment loss ≥4 mm, and >10% of sites with
bleeding on probing
7
Tahbaz
2017
Iran
44/56
N/A
100
50
50
N/A
8
Ustaoglu
2018
Turkey
81/74
Range: 18-65
155
60
95
N/A
9
Venkata
2017
India
23/22
Mean: 39
45
30
15
Periodontal depth ≥ 5 mm at more than 30% of sites with relative attachment level
≥ 3 mm and more than 10% of sites with bleeding on probing
Abbreviations: N/A, not available; SD, standard deviation.
Table 5
Oral H. pylori status in studies excluded from the meta-analysis
Sl. no.
Positive
Negative
Chronic periodontitis—Helicobacter
pylori positive
Chronic periodontitis—H. pylori negative
Detection method
Exact location
1
PCR:21/Culture:9
PCR:29/culture: 41
PCR:21/culture: 9
PCR:29/culture: 41
PCR and culture
Subgingival plaque
2
4
63
4
63
PCR
Supra- and subgingival plaque
3
Mean frequency detection (SD): 33 (47)
Mean frequency detection (SD): 50 (33)
Mean frequency detection (SD): 12 (20)
PCR
Subgingival plaque
4
9[a ]
8[a ]
9[a ]
8[a ]
PCR
Subgingival plaque
5
5[b ]
18[b ]
3[b ]
13[b ]
PCR
Dental plaque
6
33.3% of subgingival
biofilm samples
66.6% of subgingival
biofilm samples
50% of samples
50% of samples
PCR
Subgingival plaque
7
5
95
4
96
PCR
Subgingival plaque
8
0
155
0
60
PCR
Subgingival plaque
9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
PCR
Subgingival plaque
Abbreviations: N/A, not available; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; SD, standard deviation.
a The sum of positive and negative cases is not equal to the given sample size
b Number out of extracted third molars.
Table 6
Helicobacter pylori in the stomach in studies excluded from the meta-analysis
Sl. no.
Positive
Negative
Chronic periodontitis—Helicobacter pylori positive
Chronic periodontitis—H. pylori negative
Detection method
1
30
20
30
20
Histology and RUT
2
23
44
23
44
RUT
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7
7
93
5
45
N/A
8
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Abbreviations: N/A, not available; RUT, rapid urease test.
Risk of Bias Assessment
The quality of the included studies was assessed by NOS. According to NOS, the risk
of bias was low ([Fig. 2 ]). A detailed graph of bias items for each included study is presented in [Fig. 3 ].
Fig. 2 Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgments about each
risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Fig. 3 Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgments about each
risk of bias item for each included study.
Association between H. pylori and Chronic Periodontitis
The odds of presence of oral H. pylori in patients with chronic periodontitis were higher compared with healthy controls
for oral (OR = 1.87, p = 0.12—[Fig. 4 ]) and stomach (OR = 1.80, p = 0.15—[Fig. 5 ]) detections.
Fig. 4 Forest plot of comparison: Presence of Helicobacter pylori , outcome: Prevalence of oral H. pylori. CI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous.
Fig. 5 Forest plot of comparison: Presence of Helicobacter pylori , outcome: Prevalence of H. pylori in the stomach. CI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous.
Subgroup Analyses
Subgroup analysis was performed based on the detection method of oral H. pylori . When PCR was applied, the odds of the presence of oral H. pylori in patients with chronic periodontitis were lower compared with healthy controls
(OR = 0.71, p = 0.47—[Fig. 6 ]). When RUT was applied, the odds were higher (OR = 2.88, p = 0.01—[Fig. 6 ]).
Fig. 6 Forest plot of comparison: Presence of Helicobacter pylori , outcome: Prevalence of oral H. pylori . Subgroup analysis based on detection method. CI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction; RUT, rapid urease test.
Sensitivity Analyses
The study results were not changed after excluding the Salehi et al[40 ] (reason: H. pylori detected in gingival crevicular fluid—[Fig. 7 ]) and Silva et al[41 ] studies (reason: zero-count correction—[Fig. 8 ]).
Fig. 7 Forest plot of comparison: Presence of Helicobacter pylori , outcome: Prevalence of H. pylori in subgingival plaque. CI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous.
Fig. 8 Forest plot of comparison: Presence of Helicobacter pylori , outcome: Prevalence of oral H. pylori . Sensitivity analysis (study of Silva et al[41 ] excluded). CI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous.
Evaluation for Publication Bias
Publication bias could not be assessed as the meta-analysis included only four studies.
Strength of the Evidence
The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of the evidence. As all included studies
were observational, their initial rating was low. Based on the predefined GRADE criteria,
the overall strength of the evidence was low ([Table 7 ]).
Table 7
GRADE-Strength of the evidence
First author
Al Asqah et al[38 ]
Nisha et al[39 ]
Salehi et al[40 ]
Silva et al[41 ]
Year
2009
2016
2013
2010
Study type
Case–control
Cross-sectional
Case–control
Case–control
Initial rating
Low
Low
Low
Low
Comparison
Patients with chronic periodontitis vs. healthy controls
Patients with chronic periodontitis vs. healthy controls
Patients with chronic periodontitis vs. healthy controls
Patients with chronic periodontitis vs. healthy controls
Outcome—prevalence of H. pylori
RUT (oral Helicobacter pylori )/ RUT (H. pylori in the stomach)
RUT (oral H. pylori )/ Serology (H. pylori in the stomach)
PCR (oral H. pylori )/PCR, histology (H. pylori in the stomach)
PCR (oral H. pylori )
Study limitations (risk of bias)
Low risk (no reason to downgrade)
Low risk (no reason to downgrade)
Low risk (no reason to downgrade)
Unclear risk (-1)
Inconsistency
Not applicable no reason to downgrade)
Not applicable (no reason to downgrade)
Not applicable (no reasons to downgrade)
Not applicable (no reason to downgrade)
Indirectness of evidence
Direct evidence (no reason to downgrade)
Direct evidence (no reason to downgrade)
Direct evidence (no reason to downgrade)
Direct evidence (no reason to downgrade)
Imprecision
Wide CI (−1)
Not wide CI (no reason to downgrade)
Wide CI (−1)
Not applicable (no reason to upgrade)
Publication bias
Not applicable (no reason to upgrade)
Not applicable (no reason to upgrade)
Not applicable (no reason to upgrade)
Not applicable (no reason to upgrade)
Magnitude of effect
OR > 2. Large effect (+1)
OR > 2. Large effect (+1)
Moderate effect
Not available
Dose–response relationship
Not available data (no reason to upgrade)
Not available data (no reason to upgrade)
Severity of periodontitis affected H. pylori , but not statistically significant (+1)
Not available data (no reason to upgrade)
All plausible biases—confounders
No additional confounders referred
Residual confounders referred sufficiently (+1)
No additional confounders referred
No additional confounders referred
Final rating
Low
High
Low
Very low
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
RUT, rapid urease test.
Discussion
The role of chronic periodontitis in the recurrence of H. pylori infection and/or the resistance to gastric H. pylori eradication has been demonstrated by several studies.[42 ] Α two-way association between these two disease entities has been suggested.[29 ] The present meta-analysis provided evidence for an association between the presence
of H. pylori in the subgingival plaque and chronic periodontal disease, as H. pylori was detected at a higher rate in the subgingival plaque of patients with periodontitis
compared with healthy controls. This finding is consistent with a recent meta-analysis,
which concluded that periodontitis is associated with oral H. pylori infection due to the presence of the bacterium in saliva and plaque in general.[43 ] Furthermore, original studies[44 ]
[45 ] using the PCR method arrived at the same conclusion by demonstrating the subgingival
plaque as a supply reservoir of H. pylori infection in patients with periodontitis. However, other studies did not detect H. pylori in the subgingival plaque of patients with chronic periodontitis using the same method.[46 ]
[47 ]
[48 ] The reason for this divergence may be the differences in methodological procedures,
population samples,[49 ]
[50 ] PCR primers,[51 ]
[52 ] sampling methods, and protocols.[51 ] Even the collection of the subgingival sample by paper cones differs from the use
of periodontal curettes, as the cones can carry a smaller and, therefore, undetectable
microbial load.[44 ] This fact may be the reason why, in the present meta-analysis, the significant association
between subgingival H. pylori and periodontitis is lost when the sample includes Gingival Crevicular Fluid (GCF).
Another reason for the divergence could be the transient presence of H. pylori in the oral cavity. Some authors argue that H. pylori exists in the oral cavity only as a transient organism, as other competing species
colonize and predominate.[53 ]
H. pylori infection may be indirectly related to periodontitis via periopathogenic oral cavity
microbes that can compete and bind H. pylori strains. This binding of H. pylori by periodontal disease bacteria may lead to a cross-antigenicity of H. pylori and periopathogens through heat shock proteins, resulting in an increased inflammatory
immune response.[53 ]
[54 ] Furthermore, the transient presence of H. pylori in the oral cavity may be due to its contamination by gastric fluid that reflux from
the stomach.[47 ]
[55 ]
The present study concluded that gastric H. pylori infection is not associated with periodontal disease, consistent with part[56 ]
[57 ] but not all of the literature.[38 ]
[58 ] Studies have supported the correlation between the H. pylori presence in the stomach and periodontitis, concluding that periodontal treatment
contributes to the most effective and long-lasting eradication of gastric H. pylori .[30 ]
[59 ] However, the possibility of different H. pylori genotypes in the oral cavity and stomach of the same individual[60 ]
[61 ] may be the reason for the additional diagnostic difficulty. Cześnikiewicz-Guzik
et al[62 ] did not find an association between the occurrence of H. pylori in the stomach and the oral cavity. This finding suggests that other factors, such
as susceptibility to infection due to the acidic environment in the stomach, are the
main cause of gastric infection with the bacterium. At the same time, the oral cavity
can only serve as a means of transient food-related H. pylori contamination.
In the present meta-analysis, the correlation between subgingival H. pylori and periodontitis was significant only when H. pylori was detected by RUT, while this was not the case with PCR. RUT sensitivity ranges
from 77 to more than 90%, and its specificity from 98 to 100%.[63 ]
[64 ]
[65 ]
[66 ] Song et al[60 ] concluded that the oral cavity may be a permanent H. pylori reservoir that can host multiple strains of the bacterium. The different sensitivity
of the methods to different H. pylori strains could explain why RUT detected a higher percentage of H. pylori , as in the PCR method, depending on used primers amplificated specific strains. However,
false-positive results of the RUT method are possible under certain conditions, as
microorganisms, such as Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, and Citrobacter freundii , which colonize the oral cavity and/or stomach, have urease activity.[16 ] On the other hand, one possible reason that PCR detected H. pylori more frequently in controls could be the method's main disadvantage, which is the
detection of non-living bacteria.[67 ]
Two of this study's strengths are the comprehensive literature search and the assessment
of the gray literature to restrict publication bias. Detecting H. pylori in both subgingival plaque and gingival crevicular fluid provides a better understanding
of the association between the presence of H. pylori and chronic periodontitis, given the limited evidence from the literature. One additional
strength of this review is the focus on chronic periodontitis, whereas most studies
have assessed the presence of H. pylori in periodontal diseases in general, including gingivitis.
A couple of limitations are also observed in this study. The number of selected studies
was low, restricting authors from conducting additional analyses, such as funnel plots.
In each of these studies, a different method for detecting gastric H. pylori was performed, which can be explained by the absence of a gold standard detection
method. In addition, an alternative of zero-count correction was performed by adding
one event in each of the cells of study results by Silva et al. Although, in some
meta-analysis tools, this procedure is made automatically by adding 0.5 in each of
the cells, no difference was observed in the results by either including or excluding
the study mentioned above, leading authors to make this amendment.
Although the term chronic periodontitis has been sufficiently described in previous
classification systems, all subjects with periodontal pockets being more than 3 mm
were considered periodontitis cases. In addition, it was not feasible to spot any
studies in which H. pylori was detected in periodontal pockets, as it was designed in the protocol.
Future studies should be more specific regarding the level of periodontal destruction
to investigate in detail whether there is a dose–response association between the
presence of H. pylori and the stages of chronic periodontitis. There is also a need for more studies assessing
H. pylori in gingival crevicular fluid, as the current evidence is limited.
In summary, there is no evidence of an association between chronic periodontitis and
the prevalence of H. pylori , when the latter is detected either in specific oral cavity areas or in the stomach.
The detection method of oral H. pylori can play an important role in affecting this association.