Article Type : Research Article
Authors : Bharat J
Keywords : Dental sciences
Periodontal diseases are characterized by loss of epithelial attachment and bone loss. Individuals often present with yellowish and brownish discoloration which is commonly called as calculus. Calculus can be defined as a hard deposit that is formed by mineralization of dental plaque on the surfaces of natural teeth and dental prosthesis which are usually covered by a layer of unmineralized plaque [1]. Dental calculus is a chief contributing factor in the development of periodontal diseases [1]. The prerequisite for calculus is dental plaque. Calculus is a big problem because it serves many purposes like accumulation of bacterial toxins and prevention of adequate elimination (as it contains lot of surface roughness). For the patient, it becomes difficult to maintain oral hygiene [2]. A series of factors are related to calculus formation. Among them the prominent factors are bacterial plaque retention, biochemical factors (characterized by saliva or crevicular fluid), microorganisms and dietary factors [3-6]. It is often observed that dental calculus formation is not uniform among various groups of population and its deposition varies widely from individual to individual. Some subjects, despite maintaining good plaque control have an inherent tendency to accumulate calculus in an extraordinary way. It simply means that even frequent visits to the dentist could not help the individuals to maintain oral hygiene. Hence this clinical view has aimed to signify the importance of calculus in progression of periodontal diseases.
Flowchart 1: Classification (Source et -Aghanashini et al, (2016)).
Microbes are responsible for any type of infection in the body. Oral cavity is sterile at birth (Carranza 10th edition) [7,8]. Dental plaque also harbors a lot of bacteria (Anerud, 1991) [9,10]. Among them, the major are red complex bacteria namely Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema palladium and Tannerela Forsythus (Hafazee and Socransky, 1994) [11]. They are clinically significant because they are present at sites where there is a lot of bleeding. Some enzymes like Lactate dehydrogenase and alkaline or acid phosphatase have been identified in dental plaque sand are in association and development of the plaque [1]. Bacteria are not essential for calculus formation, but they are responsible for its development. Hence, high amount of calculus indicates that oral hygiene has been poor for months or even years [6]. Even calculus was observed in germ free animals also (Gustaffson & Norman, 1962) [12].
Figure 1 and 2: Clinical difference between supra gingival calculus and subgingival calculus.
Flowchart 3: Differences between supragingival vs subgingival calculus.
Flowcharts 5-9: Theories of
calculus formation.
It is a really an
uphill task to determine the effects of calculus and plaque on gingiva since
calculus is always having with plaque on dentition There is always a
correlation between the presence of calculus and prevalence of gingivitis. This
association may lead to proliferation of periodontal diseases. The rough
calculus was found to initiate inflammation in the adjacent periodontal
tissues, and it acts as an ideal substrate for subgingival microbial
colonization (thereby acting as a niche harboring bacterial plaque) [13]. It is
also acting as an irritant to the periodontal tissues, distends the periodontal
pocket wall and is responsible for inhibition of polymorph nuclear leukocytes.
So, despite the primary or secondary relationship in pocket formation (refers
to periodontal disease progression and continuous irritation), calculus is a
significant pathogenic factor in periodontal disease [6].
But various
studies have emphasized that calculus do have a major role in progression of
calculus. Ainamo (1970) found a high positive correlation between calculus
(both supra- and subgingival and gingivitis) in 154 army individuals of age
groups (19 and 22) based on retention index (RI) [13,14]. They
observed that there was some association between the microflora of gingivitis
and calculus (different from caries microflora). Ainamo (1970) also found that
there was more prominence of gingivitis as well as calculus deposits on oral
than on facial surfaces of premolars and molars [13]. It can be explained based
on area where the salivary secretions (supragingival calculus was in higher
concentration) are greater, thereby showing the pathogenicity of calculus along
with plaque as detrimental when compared to that of plaque alone. Alexander
(1971) also observed the same findings [15]. Buckley (1980) examined
the prevalence of subgingival and supragingival calculus among 300 individuals
(teenagers of age group 15 -17 years). But his findings were contrary as
compared to other individuals [16]. He found greater prevalence of subgingival
calculus when compared to supragingival calculus. However, distribution pattern
was same. Furthermore, Lennon and Clerehugh (1984) explored (in 2-year
longitudinal study) the role of sub-gingival calculus in periodontal disease in
teenagers [17]. They concluded that the presence of subgingival
calculus was the best predictor of future attachment loss. Axelsson and Lindhe
(1981) conducted a 6-year longitudinal study to determine the prevention of
caries and periodontal disease by oral hygiene maintenance and repeated
prophylaxis [18]. The study concluded that subjects who utilized proper oral
hygiene techniques had very less signs of gingivitis and periodontal tissue
attachment loss. Even caries was also absent. Similar strategies of frequent
recalls (characteristic of all the adult plaque control) were done by Goteborg
[1]. All these studies highlighted that the plaque control and professional
oral prophylaxis had certainly played an important role in maintaining the
gingival and periodontal health. Tagge et al (1975) did a comparative study by
assessing both clinically and microscopically, the soft tissue response in
suprabony periodontal pockets after treatment by root planning and oral hygiene
and oral hygiene
measures alone [19]. It was observed that the therapies decreased the incidence
and severity of gingivitis along with pocket depth. However, root planning
combined with oral hygiene measures resulted in a statistically significant
improvement when compared to personal oral hygiene measures alone. The reason
could be attributed to the lack of tooth brushing effectiveness on the non-root
planed teeth (having subgingival deposits) on the non-root than in those
treated by root planning with oral hygiene prophylaxis. Morrison et al (1980)
examined the effects of initial and non-surgical periodontal treatment on the
periodontitis and its severity [20]. The results showed that there was a
significant reduction in inflammation after removal of the plaque and calculus
deposits. Also, it was observed in their findings that changes in plaque scores
could not be correlated with attachment level gain and pocket depth reduction,
but removal of subgingival calculus is the key factor for the results.
Calculus is an important factor for periodontitis.Among
the two components, subgingival calculus is proven to effect the clinical
attachment level and pocket depth. Removal of calculus is must for adequate
gingival health. Hence, every clinician should focus on removal of calculus
timely and individuals should maintain oral hygiene with priority.