Gingival crevicular fluid: a new diagnostic aid in managing the periodontal patient.
On the whole, the studies on GCF have demonstrated that the flow of this fluid is sufficiently indicative of the inflammatory state that it can be used under a variety of clinical conditions to monitor and control gingival inflammation. Since gingivitis is extremely common, and since some cases of gingivitis presumably do not progress to periodontitis, the question could be posed whether or not a concerted effort to control inflammation (i.e. trying to achieve a GCF flow as near to zero as possible) would be clinically significant. Until there is evidence to the contrary, the answer must be "yes", since few cases are known where periodontitis occurs without being preceded by gingivitis. In other words, the control of all gingivitis, if feasible, should prevent most cases of periodontitis. Although control of all gingivitis would mean the treatment of many cases that would not progress to periodontal breakdown, such efforts would be worth-while if most periodontal destruction were prevented. Even the early destructive lesion exhibiting little or no inflammation may soon be identified, mainly because the minute volume of fluid collected from the gingival crevice can now be measured accurately. Accordingly, the concentration of various constituents in the GCF can be determined, which should lead to the development of tests to differentiate between pockets undergoing active destruction with minimal inflammation from the majority of active lesions that are intimately involved with frank inflammation. Thus, a clinician would measure sub-clinical gingival inflammation by measuring GCF flow, then differentiate destructive from quiescent lesions by analyzing the GCF sample for some constituent(s), chemical or microbial (Listgarten et al. 1975) indicative of the periodontal destructive process. Monitoring the flow of GCF might be of value in other clinical situations. For example, one could monitor the response of gingival tissues to various restorative and prosthetic procedures (Strauss et al. 1975) to ensure that these procedures do not aggravate the periodontal tissues and induce gingivitis or periodontitis. The education of the patient should be easier since patients can read their own numbers on the GCF meter at each examination and self-evaluate their personal periodontal condition and the effectiveness of their home care. Even the education of the dental student should be easier since he or she would have the means of self-evaluating the effectiveness of treatment, and not be as dependent upon the subjective assessment of his efforts by an instructor. Finally, monitoring GCF for various components could provide the dentist with a valuable means of easily screening patients for systemic disease. Obviously, this area of investigation is in its infancy, but does promise an exciting future for the oral diagnostician.
Gingival crevicular fluid: a new diagnostic aid in managing the periodontal patient. On the whole, the studies on GCF have demonstrated that the flow of this fluid is sufficiently indicative of the inflammatory state that it can be used under a variety of clinical conditions to monitor and control gingival inflammation. Since gingivitis is extremely common, and since some cases of gingivitis presumably do not progress to periodontitis, the question could be posed whether or not a concerted effort to control inflammation (i.e. trying to achieve a GCF flow as near to zero as possible) would be clinically significant. Until there is evidence to the contrary, the answer must be "yes", since few cases are known where periodontitis occurs without being preceded by gingivitis. In other words, the control of all gingivitis, if feasible, should prevent most cases of periodontitis. Although control of all gingivitis would mean the treatment of many cases that would not progress to periodontal breakdown, such efforts would be worth-while if most periodontal destruction were prevented. Even the early destructive lesion exhibiting little or no inflammation may soon be identified, mainly because the minute volume of fluid collected from the gingival crevice can now be measured accurately. Accordingly, the concentration of various constituents in the GCF can be determined, which should lead to the development of tests to differentiate between pockets undergoing active destruction with minimal inflammation from the majority of active lesions that are intimately involved with frank inflammation. Thus, a clinician would measure sub-clinical gingival inflammation by measuring GCF flow, then differentiate destructive from quiescent lesions by analyzing the GCF sample for some constituent(s), chemical or microbial (Listgarten et al. 1975) indicative of the periodontal destructive process. Monitoring the flow of GCF might be of value in other clinical situations. For example, one could monitor the response of gingival tissues to various restorative and prosthetic procedures (Strauss et al. 1975) to ensure that these procedures do not aggravate the periodontal tissues and induce gingivitis or periodontitis. The education of the patient should be easier since patients can read their own numbers on the GCF meter at each examination and self-evaluate their personal periodontal condition and the effectiveness of their home care. Even the education of the dental student should be easier since he or she would have the means of self-evaluating the effectiveness of treatment, and not be as dependent upon the subjective assessment of his efforts by an instructor. Finally, monitoring GCF for various components could provide the dentist with a valuable means of easily screening patients for systemic disease. Obviously, this area of investigation is in its infancy, but does promise an exciting future for the oral diagnostician.