ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Peridontopathogenic key species in correlation to the current classification system.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phylogenetic and Functional Analysis of β-Glucanases in Tannerella forsythia Reveals Distinct GH16 Family Glycoside Hydrolase Lineages in Oral Bacteria.Research square · 2026Article
- Preparation of apigenin-loaded microspheres and their effects against Porphyromonas gingivalis.Odontology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe present in-vivo-study aimed on identifying periodontopathogenic key species in correlation to the current classification system. It was evaluated if there is an association in frequency to single periodontitis stages and grades. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 100 patients that were assigned to 4 test groups (periodontitis stages I-IV) and one healthy control group, each n = 20. Samples were collected from the deepest pockets of each sextant and analyzed for: Fusobacterium nucleatum (F.n.), Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A.a.), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P.g.), Tannerella forsythia (T.f.), Treponema denticola (T.d.) and Enterococcus faecalis (E.f.).
resultsAmong all samples, F.n. was most common (98%), followed by T.f. (73%), T.d. (66%), P.g. (45%), A.a. (12%) and E.f. (3%). Controls showed no P.g., A.a. and E.f.. In stage I T.f. (p < 0.001) and T.d. (p = 0.022) were significantly more frequent. In stages II and III, P.g., T.f. and T.d. were significant (p < 0,001). In stage IV, A.a. (p = 0.003), P.g., T.f. and T.d. (p < 0.001) occurred with significant higher frequency. Grade C was more common among stage III and IV (20%) as compared to stage I and II (2.5%). Patients diagnosed with stage IV and grade C, showed significant association to A.a. (p = 0.001) and P.g. (p = 0.021).
conclusionsThe present investigation proved significant correlation between periodontopathogenic key species, disease severity and progression risk. A.a. and P.g were most frequently in stage IV and grade C. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Microbial analysis provide additional information in regard to the classification of periodontitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.