CONTENTS
 Introduction
 History
 Gingival vasculature and permeability
 Mechanisms of GCF production
 Assessment of GCF
 Composition
 GCF as a diagnostic marker
 Analysis of components
 Commercial diagnostic kits
 Clinical significance
 Conclusion
 References
INTRODUCTION
 Complex mixture of substances
Serum
WBCs
Cells
Bacteria
HISTORY
 Since 50 years….
RESEARCHERS STUDIES
Waerhaug (1952) Sulcus  pocket
Brill et al (1962) Physiology and composition
Löe and Holm-Pederson (1965) Indicator of periodontal diseases
Egelberg (1966)
Gingival vasculature and
permeability
Schroeder (1969), Listgarten
(1966)
Dentogingival structure
Sueda, Bang and Cimasoni (1969)
Presence and functions of proteins
in GCF
Ohlsson (1973), Golub(1976) &
Uitto(1978)
Collagenase & Elastase in GCF & its co-
relation with inflammation.
Gingival vasculature & permeability
 Gingival vasculature
Capillary units
Inflammation - looping
Network below epithelium
 Egelberg 1966
 Arranged in a flat layer
 Superficial position
 Diameter > 7 m
 Egelberg 1966 – slight irritation of the sulcular area
Increase in vascular permeability
 “Vascular labeling”
1. Carbon particles
2. Histamine
3. Ball-ended plugger
4. Blunted explorer
Injected carbon
particles into dogs
Healthy samples - particles
remained within the
capillaries
Acute inflammation -
particles seen in the
intercellular spaces
 Brill and Krasse 1958
 Sodium fluorescein
 Evans blue, India ink and saccharated iron oxide
 Substances penetrating the sulcular epithelium
 M. Wt. <1000 kD
Albumin, Thymidine,
Histamine, Phenytoin,
Endotoxin
Mechanisms of GCF production
 Existence of GCF - over 100 years (Black GV 1899)
 Subject of controversy
Transudate Inflammatory
exudate
CONCEPTS OF GCF PRODUCTION
Brill & Krasse 1958, Brill & Bjorn 1959 and Egelberg
1966 Production of fluid is related to an
inflammatory permeability of vessels underlying the
sulcular & junctional epithelium.
Alfano’s hypothesis (1974)
 GCF is a pre-inflammatory fluid, which is osmotically
mediated.
 In healthy gingiva….
 Increase accumulation of macromolecules , they will
diffuse intercellularly to basement membrane, an osmotic
gradient is created and flow of gingival fluid is generated
 This is not an inflammatory exudate, but may progress to
a secondary inflammatory exudate.
Pashley’s hypothesis (1976)
 Mathematical model based on Starling factors
 Gingival fluid production is modulated by…capillary
filtration & lymphatic uptake.
 Capillary fluid > Lymphatic uptake oedema/GCF
 More fluid gingival tissue compliance low.
 In health,
Oncotic pressure sulcular compartment > interstitial
fluid, net produc of ging fluid will increase
 In inflammation,
Oncotic pressure in sulcular = tissue compartment
Protein content in GCF = serum
This cancels their role in fluid production (Bang &
Cimasoni 1971)
 In inflammation, capillary pressure more than osmotic
gradient determines fluid production, thereby supporting
Alfano’s hypothesis.
Assessment of GCF
 METHODS USED FOR COLLECTION
 ESTIMATION OF THE SAMPLE
 VOLUME OF GCF
 PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH COLLECTION
METHODS USED FOR COLLECTION
1. Absorbing paper strips
2. Pre-weighed twisted threads
3. Capillary tubes / Micropipettes
4. Gingival washings
5. Other methods
Absorbing paper strips
 Whatman No. 1 and Munktell No. 3
 1.5 mm wide
1. Intrasulcular method
Brill’s technique, 1962
Löe and Holm-Pederson technique, 1965
2. Extrasulcular method
3. Modified method
Rudin et al 1970
Valazza et al 1972
 Advantages
Pre-weighed twisted threads
(Weinstein et al 1967)
Capillary tubes / Micropipettes
(Krause and Egelberg, 1962)
 Advantages - provides undiluted sample- ‘native’ GCF
 Disadvantages
 Collection of fluid
 Obtaining sample
Gingival washings
 Method given by Skapski and Lehner, 1976
 Hamilton’s microsyringe
 10 l of Hanks balanced solution
 Takamori & Oppenheim method, 1970
 Acrylic plate to cover maxilla
 Groove for plastic tubes
 4-6 ml solution – 15 min – peristaltic pump
 Disadvantages
 Modified method
 Ejection needle
 Collection needle
Other methods
 Platinum loops
 Microspatules
 Transparent / Plastic strips
ESTIMATION OF THE SAMPLE
1. Appreciation by direct viewing & staining
2. Weighing the strip
3. Periotron
Appreciation by direct viewing & staining
1. Staining with 0.2 – 2% Ninhydrin.
• Transparent ruler (Egelberg 1964)
• Sliding caliper (Bjorn et al 1965)
• Calibrated magnifying glasses (Oliver et al 1969)
• Microscope with an eye piece graticule (Wilson et al
1971)
• Photometric planimetric technique (Farsam et al 1977)
• Specially designed inexpensive paper strip viewer
(Wilson et al 1978)
2. 2gm of sodium fluorescein ( Weinstein et al, 1967)
Disadvantages
Weighing of the strip
 Weinstein et al 1967…pre-weighed twisted threads
 Cimasoni et al…pre-weighed paper strips in sealed
micro centrifugation plastic tubes.
Periotron
 Developed by Harco electronics: “HAR 600 Gingival
Crevice Fluid Meter”
 One jaw has +ve charge & another –ve charge……kept
apart by dry insulating paper strip
 Digital read out
 Advantages
 Disadvantages
1. Vol > 1 µl unable to measure.
2. Position of the strip influences readings.
VOLUME OF GCF COLLECTED
 CHALLACOMBE(1980)- Isotope dilution method-In
anterior( 0.24- 0.43 μl)- posterior( 0.43- 1.56 μl)
 CHALLACOMBE(1980)-suggested the total volume GCF
secreted in the mouth per day- 0.5 -2.4 ml fluid per day.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH COLLECTION
Contamination Sampling time
Volume
determination
Recovery from
strips
Data reporting
Contamination
 Blood
 Saliva
 Plaque
Sampling time
 Early literature suggests 5 seconds
 Adequate volume : 20–30 min
 Longer periods – increase in volume
Longer periods – change in nature of fluid
Volume determination
 Scarcity of material : 0.5 – 1 l
 Evaporation
 Percentage of error
 Use of vasoconstrictors (Hakkarainen and Ainamo 1981)
Recovery from strips
Data reporting
 Earlier work – concentration & total enzyme activity
 Lately - total amount of enzyme activity
Absolute amount
(mg)
Concentration
(mg/ml)
Composition
 CELLULAR ELEMENTS
 ELECTROLYTES
 ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
 METABOLIC AND BACTERIAL PRODUCTS
 ENZYMES AND ENZYME INHIBITORS
CELLULAR ELEMENTS
Epithelial cells, Leukocytes and bacteria
Epithelial cells - Lange and Schroeder 1971
 Cells of the sulcular epithelium
 Flattened
 Cytoplasmic filaments
 Cells originating from the junctional epithelium
 Found at the bottom of the sulcus
 Coronal to the sulcus bottom
 Role of inflammation
 Rate of renewal
 Structural characteristics of desquamating cells
 reduction in acid phosphatase activity ( Cornaz et al
1974)
Increased
permeability of
lysosomal membranes
Progressive
degeneration of the
cellular components
Leukocytes
 Differential leukocyte count in the sulcus
GCF Peripheral blood
Neutrophil 95 – 97 % 60%
Monocyte 2-3% 5-10%
Lymphocyte 1 – 2 % 20-30%
T cells 24% 50-75%
B cells 58% 15-30%
Mononuclear
phagocyte
18%
T : B 1 : 2.7 3 : 1
 Role of inflammation -  in number( Egelberg 1963)
 Phagocytic function of PMNs
AgP < CP
Bacteria
 Poor correlation to severity of gingival inflammation
and depth of pocket (Krekeler and Ferck, 1977)
ELECTROLYTES
Sodium
 Normal GCF - 158 mEq/l
Inflammation - 207 to 222 mEq/l
 Follows circadian periodicity( Kaslick et al 1970)
  pocket depth   Na
Potassium
 Mean concentration in GCF - 9.54 mEq/l
 GCF > serum
 Increases towards the middle of the day
  severity of periodontitis
 pocket depth
2x
Sodium : Potassium Ratio
 Diseased tissues   ratio
 Accumulation of intracellular potassium
 GCF < ECF ( Krasse & Egelberg, 1962)
3.9 28:1
Other ions
 Fluoride : GCF = Plasma( Whitford et al,1981)
 Calcium : Normal gingiva – 10mEq/l
Inflammed gingiva – 15.9 mEq/l
 with inflammation
GCF (30-50 x) > Serum (Biswas et al,1977)
 iPO4 : 4.2 mg / 100ml of GCF
 Mg : 0.8mEq/L
 I : 40% of the concentration in saliva
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
Carbohydrates
 Glucose, hexosamine and hexuronic acid (Hara and Loe
1969)
 Glucose : GCF > serum
 Hexosamine & Hexuronic acid – no correlation with
variation in gingival inflammation
 Increased in:
 Inflammation
 Diabetes
3-6x
Proteins
 GCF < serum
 IgG, IgA - plasma cells
 Complements  tissue damage(Schenkein & Genco,1977)
 Chemotactic attraction of PMNs
 Release of lysosomal enzymes
 Degranulation of mast cells
 Albumin , fibrinogen, ceruloplasmin, ß-lipoproteins &
transferrin ( Mann & Stoffer, 1964)
 Bradykinin (Rodin et al 1973)
Lipids
 Serum, saliva, bacteria and host tissue
Phospholipids and neutral lipids
METABOLIC AND BACTERIAL PRODUCTS
 Lactic acid – inflammation, flow
 Hydroxyproline
 Prostaglandins
 Urea and pH
 Inversely related to severity of inflammation
 GCF > saliva, serum
 pH: 7.54 - 7.89 (Bang and Cimasoni)
 Endotoxins
 Lipopolysaccharides(LPS) of cell wall of gm-ve bacteria
released from autolysing bacteria cells
 Highly toxic to gingival tissues & possible pathogenic factor in
periodontal disease.
 Shapiro 1972…+ve correlation b/w LPS conc. & ging inflam
 Cytotoxic substances - H2S
 Antibacterial factors
 Crevicular fluid was found to be as potent as leukocyte extract
in lysing Staph aureus, Strep faecalis & A. viscosus. Strep.
Mutans seemed more resistant.
 Sela et al 1980….lytic agents are the lysosomal enzymes
present in GCF
 A peroxidase mediated antimicrobial system has also been
shown in human crevicular fluid
 Growth stimulating factors – Lactobacilli ( Takamori,1963)
ENZYMES AND ENZYME INHIBITORS
Acid phosphatase
 Lysosomal enzyme
 Present in azurophil granules
 Sources : PMNs, desquamating epithelial cells
 Associated with connective tissue catabolism
 Can also attack teichoic acid
 Acts at a pH of 4 to 5
 Poor correlation with periodontal disease (Cimasoni,
1983)
Alkaline phosphatase
 Sources : PMNs, bacteria
 Plays a role in calcification
Pyrophosphatase
 Role in calculus formation
 Conc. Is positively correlated – amount of calculus
 – glucoronidase
 Lysozomal enzyme
 Primary granules of PMNs
 Sources : macrophages, fibroblasts, endothelial cells,
bacteria
 Plays a role in the catabolism of mucopolysaccharides
Lysozyme
 Major source : PMNs
 Bactericidal - hydrolyzes β-1,4–glycosidic bonds of
peptidoglycans of bacterial cell wall
 Activity : GCF, saliva > serum( Brandtzaeg &
Mann,1964)
 May contribute to the formation of pocket
 Accelerates release of bacterial enzymes(Sela ,1976)
Hyaluronidase
 Lysosomal enzyme
 Splits β-1,4–N– acetylglucosaminide links in
hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulphate
 pH : 3.5 – 4.1
 Increases – Gram positive bacteria, inflammation
(Tynelius- Brathall & Attstrom,1972)
Lactate dehydrogenase
 Pyruvate Lactate
 GCF > blood
LDH
10-20x
Proteolytic enzymes
 Mammalian proteinases
 Bacterial proteinases
 Proteinase inhibitors
CONTENTS
 Introduction
 History
 Gingival vasculature and permeability
 Mechanisms of GCF production
 Assessment of GCF
 Composition
 GCF as a diagnostic marker
 Analysis of components
 Commercial diagnostic kits
 Clinical significance
 Conclusion
 References
GCF as a diagnostic marker
 BACTERIA AND THEIR PRODUCTS
 INFLAMMATORY AND IMMUNE PRODUCTS
 ENZYMES RELEASED FROM DEAD CELLS
 CONNECTIVE TISSUE DEGRADATION PRODUCTS
 PRODUCTS OF BONE RESORPTION
BACTERIA AND THEIR PRODUCTS
 Bacterial proteases
 Trypsin-like protease
 Arg-gingipain/Arg-gingivain
 Excellent predictor (Eley & Cox,1996)
 Dipeptidylpeptidase (DPP)
 Good predictor of future progressive attachment
loss
INFLAMMATORY AND IMMUNE PRODUCTS
Immunoglobulin
 Total Ig correlates with adjacent gingival tissue
 Does not correlate with disease severity (Lamster
1992, Page 1992)
 Reduction in specific antibody  risk for disease
(AgP, ANUG) (Lamster et al,1992)
 Correlation may exist between IgG levels to P.
gingivalis & severity perio disease(Gmur et al 1986)
  IgG2 levels  recurrent or persistent destruction
Cytokines
 Interleukins - relevance to periodontal pathology
  bacteria   inflammation   IL-8   PMN
  elastase secretion
IL-1α and β Do not correlate with probing pocket depths
IL-1 Associated with progressive attachment loss
IL-2, IL-6
Might predict and associate with progressive
attachment loss
IL-6 Produced more at refractory sites
IL-8 Reduce significantly after treatment
Prostaglandins (PGE2)
 Health - low, undetectable
 Naturally occurring gingivitis - ~ 32 ng/ml
 Experimental gingivitis - ~ 53 ng/ml
 Periodontal disease activity - > 66 ng/ml
(Offenbacher et al 1986)
HYDROLYTIC ENZYMES RELEASED FROM DEAD CELLS
Enzymes
Degrade phagocytosed
material
Degrade gingival tissue
Proteolytic
enzymes
•Collagenase
•Elastase
•Cathepsin G
•Cathepsin B
•Cathepsin D
•Tryptase
•DPP II & IV
Hydrolytic
enzymes
•Aryl sulphatase
• – glucuronidase
•Alkaline
phosphatase
•Acid phosphatase
•Myloperoxidase
•Lysozyme
•Lactoferrin
Collagenase
 Gingivitis - correlate with severity of inflammation
 Human periodontitis - increase with increasing
clinical features (Golub et al,1976)
 Untreated chronic periodontitis :  MMP-8, -9
(Ingman et al, 1996; Makela et al, 1994)
 Chen et al 2000 - MMP-8 levels reduce following
therapy, also decrease in inhibitor levels
-glucuronidase
 Positively associated with
 Spirochaetes
 P. gingivalis
 P. intermedia
 Lactose-negative black pigmenting bacteria
 Negative with cocci (Lamster 1992)
Alkaline phosphatase
 Cross sectional study – correlation with pocket depth
but not with bone loss ( Ishikawa & Cimasoni,1970)
 Active sites > serum (Binder et al 1987) , associated
with periodontal disease activity
20x
Lysozyme
  in chronic periodontitis ( Markannen et al,1986)
  in AgP patients
Pseudocholinesterase
 Serum > GCF > saliva
 Significantly higher in AgP
 Levels significantly correlate with disease severity and
reduce following treatment
 Cysteine proteinases - Cathepsins B and L
 Aspartate proteinases - Cathepsin D
 Serine proteinases - Elastase, tryptase
 DPP II and IV
 -glucuronidase
 Aryl sulphatase
 Myeloperoxidase
 Lactoferrin
 Pseudocholinesterase
CYTOSOLIC ENZYMES RELEASED FROM DEAD CELLS
Aspartate transaminase
 Marker of tissue necrosis and cell death
 GCF AST - correlate with clinical indices of disease
severity (Imrey et al 1991)
 Longitudinal studies  confirmed attachment loss
(Persson et al 1990, Chambers et al 1991)
 No evidence that it can be a predictor for disease
severity / activity
Lactate dehydrogenase
 Cross-sectional studies - Correlated with PPD and
other clinical indices
 Longitudinal study - disease activity
CONNECTIVE TISSUE DEGRADATION PRODUCTS
GAGs
 Hyaluronic acid – chronic gingivitis
 Chondroitin-4-sulphate
 Untreated advanced periodontitis
 AgP
 Sulphated GAGs
 Teeth undergoing orthodontic movement
 Teeth subject to occlusal trauma
 Healing extraction wounds
PRODUCTS OF BONE RESORPTION
Osteonectin & Bone phosphoproteins
Increase with site probing depth (Bowers et al 1989)
May be associated with disease severity
No longitudinal studies done
Osteocalcin
 Possible marker for bone resorption and disease
progression
 Kunimatsu et al 1993 – first to study
 Moderate predictive value for future bone loss as
measured by radiography
Cross-linked carboxyterminal telopeptides of type 1
collagen
 Elevated CTP coincides with bone resorptive rate
(Eriksen et al, 1993)
 Has been detected in GCF in periodontitis patients as
well as experimental periodontitis in dogs
Analysis of components
TESTS COMPONENTS ANALYSED
Fluorometry MMPs
ELISA Enzyme levels and IL-1
RIA
COX derivatives and
procollagen III
HPLC Timidazole
Direct/indirect immunodot
tests
Acute phase proteins
Commercial diagnostic kits
PERIOCHECK
 Detects collagenase
 Paper strip + (collagen gel blue colour on
+ blue dye) strip
 Intensity proportional to amount of enzyme present
43C
PROGNOSTIK
 Detects elastase
 Paper strip + 7 Aminotrifluoro methylcoumarin( AFC)
 Substrate (MeOSuc-Ala-Ala-Pro-Val-AFC)
 Detects elastase
 Linked to AFC
 If elastase is present
 4 – 8 mins → releases AFC → green fluorescence
 Intensity proportional to amount of enzyme present
PERIOGARD
 To detect AST (Persson et al 1995)
 Uses paper point GCF samples
 Strip placed in suitable wells
2 drops of reagent + 2 drops of a solution
 After 9 mins, substrate / detection solution mixed
 After 10 mins, results - colorimetric detection
Potential diagnostic tests
For PGE2
 Nakashima et al, 1994 - ELISA assay utilizing a
monoclonal rabbit anti-PGE2 antibody to assay GCF
PGE2
For osteocalcin
Can be assayed using polyclonal or monoclonal
antibodies by an ELISA or RIA.
For β-glucoronidase
 A diagnostic kit based on GCF -glucuronidase is
being commercially developed by Abbott Laboratories,
North Chicago, USA.
 Based on colour detection systems
For cysteine and serine proteinase
 Based on colour detection systems
Clinical significance
 Circadian Periodicity
 Mechanical Stimulation
 Inflammation
 Smoking
 Sex Hormones
  vascular permeability   flow
 Diabetic patient
 High flow rate (Ringelberg et al 1977)
 More glucose
 Periodontal Therapy
  GCF during healing period after surgery
 After gingivectomy: 1st wk - 
At 5 wks – preoperative levels
 After first flap procedure : 
4 weeks later, levels lesser than preoperative
  following SRP and curettage
1 week after SRP: 
After second SRP: lower values are sustained
(Gwinnett 1978)
Drugs in GCF
 Advantageous in therapy
 Tetracyclines (Bader and Goldhaber, 1966)
 1/10th conc. in GCF compared to serum
 Minocycline (Ciancio et al 1980)
 GCF > blood
 Metronidazole (Eisenberg 1991)
5x
Conclusion
Monitoring periodontal disease – complicated task.
Analysis GCF constituents- extremely useful- simplicity
& non invasive.
Thorough knowledge- Better aid for diagnosis.
 Newman, Takei, Klokkevold, Carranza. 10th edition. Carranza’s
Clinical Periodontology. W. B. Saunders Company.
 Velli-Jukka Uitto. Gingival crevicular fluid. Periodontology
2000 2003, Vol. 31.
 G. Cimasoni. Volume 12. Monographs in Oral Science -
Crevicular Fluid Updated. S. Karger.
 BM Eley, JD Manson. 5th edition 2004. Periodontics. Wright
Publishers.
 Bartold PM, Narayanan AS. Periodontal connective tissues.
Quintessence books.
References
Gcf

Gcf

  • 2.
    CONTENTS  Introduction  History Gingival vasculature and permeability  Mechanisms of GCF production  Assessment of GCF  Composition  GCF as a diagnostic marker  Analysis of components  Commercial diagnostic kits  Clinical significance  Conclusion  References
  • 3.
    INTRODUCTION  Complex mixtureof substances Serum WBCs Cells Bacteria
  • 4.
    HISTORY  Since 50years…. RESEARCHERS STUDIES Waerhaug (1952) Sulcus  pocket Brill et al (1962) Physiology and composition Löe and Holm-Pederson (1965) Indicator of periodontal diseases Egelberg (1966) Gingival vasculature and permeability Schroeder (1969), Listgarten (1966) Dentogingival structure Sueda, Bang and Cimasoni (1969) Presence and functions of proteins in GCF Ohlsson (1973), Golub(1976) & Uitto(1978) Collagenase & Elastase in GCF & its co- relation with inflammation.
  • 5.
    Gingival vasculature &permeability  Gingival vasculature Capillary units Inflammation - looping Network below epithelium  Egelberg 1966  Arranged in a flat layer  Superficial position  Diameter > 7 m
  • 6.
     Egelberg 1966– slight irritation of the sulcular area Increase in vascular permeability  “Vascular labeling” 1. Carbon particles 2. Histamine 3. Ball-ended plugger 4. Blunted explorer Injected carbon particles into dogs Healthy samples - particles remained within the capillaries Acute inflammation - particles seen in the intercellular spaces
  • 7.
     Brill andKrasse 1958  Sodium fluorescein  Evans blue, India ink and saccharated iron oxide  Substances penetrating the sulcular epithelium  M. Wt. <1000 kD Albumin, Thymidine, Histamine, Phenytoin, Endotoxin
  • 8.
    Mechanisms of GCFproduction  Existence of GCF - over 100 years (Black GV 1899)  Subject of controversy Transudate Inflammatory exudate
  • 9.
    CONCEPTS OF GCFPRODUCTION Brill & Krasse 1958, Brill & Bjorn 1959 and Egelberg 1966 Production of fluid is related to an inflammatory permeability of vessels underlying the sulcular & junctional epithelium.
  • 10.
    Alfano’s hypothesis (1974) GCF is a pre-inflammatory fluid, which is osmotically mediated.  In healthy gingiva….  Increase accumulation of macromolecules , they will diffuse intercellularly to basement membrane, an osmotic gradient is created and flow of gingival fluid is generated  This is not an inflammatory exudate, but may progress to a secondary inflammatory exudate.
  • 11.
    Pashley’s hypothesis (1976) Mathematical model based on Starling factors  Gingival fluid production is modulated by…capillary filtration & lymphatic uptake.  Capillary fluid > Lymphatic uptake oedema/GCF  More fluid gingival tissue compliance low.  In health, Oncotic pressure sulcular compartment > interstitial fluid, net produc of ging fluid will increase
  • 12.
     In inflammation, Oncoticpressure in sulcular = tissue compartment Protein content in GCF = serum This cancels their role in fluid production (Bang & Cimasoni 1971)  In inflammation, capillary pressure more than osmotic gradient determines fluid production, thereby supporting Alfano’s hypothesis.
  • 13.
    Assessment of GCF METHODS USED FOR COLLECTION  ESTIMATION OF THE SAMPLE  VOLUME OF GCF  PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH COLLECTION
  • 14.
    METHODS USED FORCOLLECTION 1. Absorbing paper strips 2. Pre-weighed twisted threads 3. Capillary tubes / Micropipettes 4. Gingival washings 5. Other methods
  • 15.
    Absorbing paper strips Whatman No. 1 and Munktell No. 3  1.5 mm wide 1. Intrasulcular method Brill’s technique, 1962 Löe and Holm-Pederson technique, 1965 2. Extrasulcular method
  • 16.
    3. Modified method Rudinet al 1970 Valazza et al 1972  Advantages
  • 17.
    Pre-weighed twisted threads (Weinsteinet al 1967) Capillary tubes / Micropipettes (Krause and Egelberg, 1962)  Advantages - provides undiluted sample- ‘native’ GCF  Disadvantages  Collection of fluid  Obtaining sample
  • 18.
    Gingival washings  Methodgiven by Skapski and Lehner, 1976  Hamilton’s microsyringe  10 l of Hanks balanced solution
  • 19.
     Takamori &Oppenheim method, 1970  Acrylic plate to cover maxilla  Groove for plastic tubes  4-6 ml solution – 15 min – peristaltic pump
  • 20.
     Disadvantages  Modifiedmethod  Ejection needle  Collection needle
  • 21.
    Other methods  Platinumloops  Microspatules  Transparent / Plastic strips
  • 22.
    ESTIMATION OF THESAMPLE 1. Appreciation by direct viewing & staining 2. Weighing the strip 3. Periotron
  • 23.
    Appreciation by directviewing & staining 1. Staining with 0.2 – 2% Ninhydrin. • Transparent ruler (Egelberg 1964) • Sliding caliper (Bjorn et al 1965) • Calibrated magnifying glasses (Oliver et al 1969) • Microscope with an eye piece graticule (Wilson et al 1971) • Photometric planimetric technique (Farsam et al 1977) • Specially designed inexpensive paper strip viewer (Wilson et al 1978)
  • 24.
    2. 2gm ofsodium fluorescein ( Weinstein et al, 1967) Disadvantages Weighing of the strip  Weinstein et al 1967…pre-weighed twisted threads  Cimasoni et al…pre-weighed paper strips in sealed micro centrifugation plastic tubes.
  • 25.
    Periotron  Developed byHarco electronics: “HAR 600 Gingival Crevice Fluid Meter”  One jaw has +ve charge & another –ve charge……kept apart by dry insulating paper strip  Digital read out
  • 26.
     Advantages  Disadvantages 1.Vol > 1 µl unable to measure. 2. Position of the strip influences readings.
  • 27.
    VOLUME OF GCFCOLLECTED  CHALLACOMBE(1980)- Isotope dilution method-In anterior( 0.24- 0.43 μl)- posterior( 0.43- 1.56 μl)  CHALLACOMBE(1980)-suggested the total volume GCF secreted in the mouth per day- 0.5 -2.4 ml fluid per day.
  • 28.
    PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITHCOLLECTION Contamination Sampling time Volume determination Recovery from strips Data reporting
  • 29.
    Contamination  Blood  Saliva Plaque Sampling time  Early literature suggests 5 seconds  Adequate volume : 20–30 min  Longer periods – increase in volume Longer periods – change in nature of fluid
  • 30.
    Volume determination  Scarcityof material : 0.5 – 1 l  Evaporation  Percentage of error  Use of vasoconstrictors (Hakkarainen and Ainamo 1981) Recovery from strips
  • 31.
    Data reporting  Earlierwork – concentration & total enzyme activity  Lately - total amount of enzyme activity Absolute amount (mg) Concentration (mg/ml)
  • 32.
    Composition  CELLULAR ELEMENTS ELECTROLYTES  ORGANIC COMPOUNDS  METABOLIC AND BACTERIAL PRODUCTS  ENZYMES AND ENZYME INHIBITORS
  • 33.
    CELLULAR ELEMENTS Epithelial cells,Leukocytes and bacteria Epithelial cells - Lange and Schroeder 1971  Cells of the sulcular epithelium  Flattened  Cytoplasmic filaments  Cells originating from the junctional epithelium  Found at the bottom of the sulcus  Coronal to the sulcus bottom
  • 34.
     Role ofinflammation  Rate of renewal  Structural characteristics of desquamating cells  reduction in acid phosphatase activity ( Cornaz et al 1974) Increased permeability of lysosomal membranes Progressive degeneration of the cellular components
  • 35.
    Leukocytes  Differential leukocytecount in the sulcus GCF Peripheral blood Neutrophil 95 – 97 % 60% Monocyte 2-3% 5-10% Lymphocyte 1 – 2 % 20-30% T cells 24% 50-75% B cells 58% 15-30% Mononuclear phagocyte 18% T : B 1 : 2.7 3 : 1
  • 36.
     Role ofinflammation -  in number( Egelberg 1963)  Phagocytic function of PMNs AgP < CP
  • 37.
    Bacteria  Poor correlationto severity of gingival inflammation and depth of pocket (Krekeler and Ferck, 1977)
  • 38.
    ELECTROLYTES Sodium  Normal GCF- 158 mEq/l Inflammation - 207 to 222 mEq/l  Follows circadian periodicity( Kaslick et al 1970)   pocket depth   Na
  • 39.
    Potassium  Mean concentrationin GCF - 9.54 mEq/l  GCF > serum  Increases towards the middle of the day   severity of periodontitis  pocket depth 2x
  • 40.
    Sodium : PotassiumRatio  Diseased tissues   ratio  Accumulation of intracellular potassium  GCF < ECF ( Krasse & Egelberg, 1962) 3.9 28:1
  • 41.
    Other ions  Fluoride: GCF = Plasma( Whitford et al,1981)  Calcium : Normal gingiva – 10mEq/l Inflammed gingiva – 15.9 mEq/l  with inflammation GCF (30-50 x) > Serum (Biswas et al,1977)  iPO4 : 4.2 mg / 100ml of GCF  Mg : 0.8mEq/L  I : 40% of the concentration in saliva
  • 42.
    ORGANIC COMPOUNDS Carbohydrates  Glucose,hexosamine and hexuronic acid (Hara and Loe 1969)  Glucose : GCF > serum  Hexosamine & Hexuronic acid – no correlation with variation in gingival inflammation  Increased in:  Inflammation  Diabetes 3-6x
  • 43.
    Proteins  GCF <serum  IgG, IgA - plasma cells  Complements  tissue damage(Schenkein & Genco,1977)  Chemotactic attraction of PMNs  Release of lysosomal enzymes  Degranulation of mast cells  Albumin , fibrinogen, ceruloplasmin, ß-lipoproteins & transferrin ( Mann & Stoffer, 1964)  Bradykinin (Rodin et al 1973)
  • 44.
    Lipids  Serum, saliva,bacteria and host tissue Phospholipids and neutral lipids
  • 45.
    METABOLIC AND BACTERIALPRODUCTS  Lactic acid – inflammation, flow  Hydroxyproline  Prostaglandins  Urea and pH  Inversely related to severity of inflammation  GCF > saliva, serum  pH: 7.54 - 7.89 (Bang and Cimasoni)
  • 46.
     Endotoxins  Lipopolysaccharides(LPS)of cell wall of gm-ve bacteria released from autolysing bacteria cells  Highly toxic to gingival tissues & possible pathogenic factor in periodontal disease.  Shapiro 1972…+ve correlation b/w LPS conc. & ging inflam  Cytotoxic substances - H2S
  • 47.
     Antibacterial factors Crevicular fluid was found to be as potent as leukocyte extract in lysing Staph aureus, Strep faecalis & A. viscosus. Strep. Mutans seemed more resistant.  Sela et al 1980….lytic agents are the lysosomal enzymes present in GCF  A peroxidase mediated antimicrobial system has also been shown in human crevicular fluid  Growth stimulating factors – Lactobacilli ( Takamori,1963)
  • 48.
    ENZYMES AND ENZYMEINHIBITORS Acid phosphatase  Lysosomal enzyme  Present in azurophil granules  Sources : PMNs, desquamating epithelial cells  Associated with connective tissue catabolism  Can also attack teichoic acid  Acts at a pH of 4 to 5  Poor correlation with periodontal disease (Cimasoni, 1983)
  • 49.
    Alkaline phosphatase  Sources: PMNs, bacteria  Plays a role in calcification Pyrophosphatase  Role in calculus formation  Conc. Is positively correlated – amount of calculus
  • 50.
     – glucoronidase Lysozomal enzyme  Primary granules of PMNs  Sources : macrophages, fibroblasts, endothelial cells, bacteria  Plays a role in the catabolism of mucopolysaccharides
  • 51.
    Lysozyme  Major source: PMNs  Bactericidal - hydrolyzes β-1,4–glycosidic bonds of peptidoglycans of bacterial cell wall  Activity : GCF, saliva > serum( Brandtzaeg & Mann,1964)  May contribute to the formation of pocket  Accelerates release of bacterial enzymes(Sela ,1976)
  • 52.
    Hyaluronidase  Lysosomal enzyme Splits β-1,4–N– acetylglucosaminide links in hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulphate  pH : 3.5 – 4.1  Increases – Gram positive bacteria, inflammation (Tynelius- Brathall & Attstrom,1972)
  • 53.
    Lactate dehydrogenase  PyruvateLactate  GCF > blood LDH 10-20x
  • 54.
    Proteolytic enzymes  Mammalianproteinases  Bacterial proteinases  Proteinase inhibitors
  • 57.
    CONTENTS  Introduction  History Gingival vasculature and permeability  Mechanisms of GCF production  Assessment of GCF  Composition  GCF as a diagnostic marker  Analysis of components  Commercial diagnostic kits  Clinical significance  Conclusion  References
  • 58.
    GCF as adiagnostic marker  BACTERIA AND THEIR PRODUCTS  INFLAMMATORY AND IMMUNE PRODUCTS  ENZYMES RELEASED FROM DEAD CELLS  CONNECTIVE TISSUE DEGRADATION PRODUCTS  PRODUCTS OF BONE RESORPTION
  • 59.
    BACTERIA AND THEIRPRODUCTS  Bacterial proteases  Trypsin-like protease  Arg-gingipain/Arg-gingivain  Excellent predictor (Eley & Cox,1996)  Dipeptidylpeptidase (DPP)  Good predictor of future progressive attachment loss
  • 60.
    INFLAMMATORY AND IMMUNEPRODUCTS Immunoglobulin  Total Ig correlates with adjacent gingival tissue  Does not correlate with disease severity (Lamster 1992, Page 1992)  Reduction in specific antibody  risk for disease (AgP, ANUG) (Lamster et al,1992)  Correlation may exist between IgG levels to P. gingivalis & severity perio disease(Gmur et al 1986)   IgG2 levels  recurrent or persistent destruction
  • 61.
    Cytokines  Interleukins -relevance to periodontal pathology   bacteria   inflammation   IL-8   PMN   elastase secretion IL-1α and β Do not correlate with probing pocket depths IL-1 Associated with progressive attachment loss IL-2, IL-6 Might predict and associate with progressive attachment loss IL-6 Produced more at refractory sites IL-8 Reduce significantly after treatment
  • 62.
    Prostaglandins (PGE2)  Health- low, undetectable  Naturally occurring gingivitis - ~ 32 ng/ml  Experimental gingivitis - ~ 53 ng/ml  Periodontal disease activity - > 66 ng/ml (Offenbacher et al 1986)
  • 63.
    HYDROLYTIC ENZYMES RELEASEDFROM DEAD CELLS Enzymes Degrade phagocytosed material Degrade gingival tissue Proteolytic enzymes •Collagenase •Elastase •Cathepsin G •Cathepsin B •Cathepsin D •Tryptase •DPP II & IV Hydrolytic enzymes •Aryl sulphatase • – glucuronidase •Alkaline phosphatase •Acid phosphatase •Myloperoxidase •Lysozyme •Lactoferrin
  • 64.
    Collagenase  Gingivitis -correlate with severity of inflammation  Human periodontitis - increase with increasing clinical features (Golub et al,1976)  Untreated chronic periodontitis :  MMP-8, -9 (Ingman et al, 1996; Makela et al, 1994)  Chen et al 2000 - MMP-8 levels reduce following therapy, also decrease in inhibitor levels
  • 65.
    -glucuronidase  Positively associatedwith  Spirochaetes  P. gingivalis  P. intermedia  Lactose-negative black pigmenting bacteria  Negative with cocci (Lamster 1992)
  • 66.
    Alkaline phosphatase  Crosssectional study – correlation with pocket depth but not with bone loss ( Ishikawa & Cimasoni,1970)  Active sites > serum (Binder et al 1987) , associated with periodontal disease activity 20x
  • 67.
    Lysozyme   inchronic periodontitis ( Markannen et al,1986)   in AgP patients Pseudocholinesterase  Serum > GCF > saliva  Significantly higher in AgP
  • 68.
     Levels significantlycorrelate with disease severity and reduce following treatment  Cysteine proteinases - Cathepsins B and L  Aspartate proteinases - Cathepsin D  Serine proteinases - Elastase, tryptase  DPP II and IV  -glucuronidase  Aryl sulphatase  Myeloperoxidase  Lactoferrin  Pseudocholinesterase
  • 69.
    CYTOSOLIC ENZYMES RELEASEDFROM DEAD CELLS Aspartate transaminase  Marker of tissue necrosis and cell death  GCF AST - correlate with clinical indices of disease severity (Imrey et al 1991)  Longitudinal studies  confirmed attachment loss (Persson et al 1990, Chambers et al 1991)  No evidence that it can be a predictor for disease severity / activity
  • 70.
    Lactate dehydrogenase  Cross-sectionalstudies - Correlated with PPD and other clinical indices  Longitudinal study - disease activity
  • 71.
    CONNECTIVE TISSUE DEGRADATIONPRODUCTS GAGs  Hyaluronic acid – chronic gingivitis  Chondroitin-4-sulphate  Untreated advanced periodontitis  AgP  Sulphated GAGs  Teeth undergoing orthodontic movement  Teeth subject to occlusal trauma  Healing extraction wounds
  • 72.
    PRODUCTS OF BONERESORPTION Osteonectin & Bone phosphoproteins Increase with site probing depth (Bowers et al 1989) May be associated with disease severity No longitudinal studies done
  • 73.
    Osteocalcin  Possible markerfor bone resorption and disease progression  Kunimatsu et al 1993 – first to study  Moderate predictive value for future bone loss as measured by radiography
  • 74.
    Cross-linked carboxyterminal telopeptidesof type 1 collagen  Elevated CTP coincides with bone resorptive rate (Eriksen et al, 1993)  Has been detected in GCF in periodontitis patients as well as experimental periodontitis in dogs
  • 75.
    Analysis of components TESTSCOMPONENTS ANALYSED Fluorometry MMPs ELISA Enzyme levels and IL-1 RIA COX derivatives and procollagen III HPLC Timidazole Direct/indirect immunodot tests Acute phase proteins
  • 76.
    Commercial diagnostic kits PERIOCHECK Detects collagenase  Paper strip + (collagen gel blue colour on + blue dye) strip  Intensity proportional to amount of enzyme present 43C
  • 77.
    PROGNOSTIK  Detects elastase Paper strip + 7 Aminotrifluoro methylcoumarin( AFC)  Substrate (MeOSuc-Ala-Ala-Pro-Val-AFC)  Detects elastase  Linked to AFC  If elastase is present  4 – 8 mins → releases AFC → green fluorescence  Intensity proportional to amount of enzyme present
  • 78.
    PERIOGARD  To detectAST (Persson et al 1995)  Uses paper point GCF samples  Strip placed in suitable wells 2 drops of reagent + 2 drops of a solution  After 9 mins, substrate / detection solution mixed  After 10 mins, results - colorimetric detection
  • 79.
    Potential diagnostic tests ForPGE2  Nakashima et al, 1994 - ELISA assay utilizing a monoclonal rabbit anti-PGE2 antibody to assay GCF PGE2 For osteocalcin Can be assayed using polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies by an ELISA or RIA.
  • 80.
    For β-glucoronidase  Adiagnostic kit based on GCF -glucuronidase is being commercially developed by Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, USA.  Based on colour detection systems For cysteine and serine proteinase  Based on colour detection systems
  • 81.
    Clinical significance  CircadianPeriodicity  Mechanical Stimulation  Inflammation  Smoking
  • 82.
     Sex Hormones  vascular permeability   flow  Diabetic patient  High flow rate (Ringelberg et al 1977)  More glucose
  • 83.
     Periodontal Therapy  GCF during healing period after surgery  After gingivectomy: 1st wk -  At 5 wks – preoperative levels  After first flap procedure :  4 weeks later, levels lesser than preoperative   following SRP and curettage 1 week after SRP:  After second SRP: lower values are sustained (Gwinnett 1978)
  • 84.
    Drugs in GCF Advantageous in therapy  Tetracyclines (Bader and Goldhaber, 1966)  1/10th conc. in GCF compared to serum  Minocycline (Ciancio et al 1980)  GCF > blood  Metronidazole (Eisenberg 1991) 5x
  • 85.
    Conclusion Monitoring periodontal disease– complicated task. Analysis GCF constituents- extremely useful- simplicity & non invasive. Thorough knowledge- Better aid for diagnosis.
  • 86.
     Newman, Takei,Klokkevold, Carranza. 10th edition. Carranza’s Clinical Periodontology. W. B. Saunders Company.  Velli-Jukka Uitto. Gingival crevicular fluid. Periodontology 2000 2003, Vol. 31.  G. Cimasoni. Volume 12. Monographs in Oral Science - Crevicular Fluid Updated. S. Karger.  BM Eley, JD Manson. 5th edition 2004. Periodontics. Wright Publishers.  Bartold PM, Narayanan AS. Periodontal connective tissues. Quintessence books. References

Editor's Notes

  • #12 Starlings hypothesis states that the fluid movement due to filtration across the wall of a capillary is dependent on the balance between the hydrostatic pressure gradient and the oncotic pressure gradient across the capillary
  • #44 α-globulin, ceruloplasmin, -lipoprotein and transferrin Similarity in composition of GCF and plasma support the concept that it is an inflammatory exudate
  • #49 Since the same enzyme is present in both desquamated epithelial cells and oral bacteria.
  • #72 Chondroitin 4 sulphate - Metabolic activity of the deeper-seated periodontal tissues, notably alveolar bone.
  • #76 High pressure liquid chromatography