PeerJ (Nov 2024)
Reliability and utility of blood glucose levels in the periodontal pockets of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study
Abstract
Background Several studies have measured gingival blood glucose (GBG) levels, but few have confirmed systematic bias using Bland–Altman analysis. This study compared the effectiveness of GBG levels with that of fingertip blood glucose (FTBG) levels using Bland–Altman and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Methods A total of 15 healthy volunteers and 15 patients with type 2 diabetes were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Each group comprised eight male and seven female participants. The GBG and FTBG levels were measured using a self-monitoring blood glucose device after periodontal examination. Pearson’s product‒moment correlation and simple linear regression analyses were performed. In addition, Bland‒Altman analysis was also performed to assess the degree of agreement between the two methods. ROC analysis was conducted to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cutoff values for patients with diabetes. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to identify significant differences. Results The mean GBG and FTBG levels were 120 ± 44.8 mg/dL and 137 ± 45.1, respectively, for the whole sample. The mean GBG and FTBG levels were 145 ± 47.2 mg/dL and 163 ± 49.1, respectively, in the diabetes group. The mean GBG and FTBG levels in the nondiabetes group were 95.3 ± 25.2 and 111 ± 18.8, respectively. Patients with diabetes were more likely to have a probing pocket depth (PPD) of ≥4 mm at the sampled site. Pearson’s product‒moment correlation and simple linear regression analyses revealed a significant correlation between the GBG and FTBG measurements. Bland–Altman analysis revealed that GBG and FTBG measurements differed significantly among all participants; however, no significant differences were observed among the patients with diabetes (mean difference (MD) ± standard deviation (SD) = −18.1 ± 34.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) [−37.0 to 0.88]) or among the participants with a PPD of ≥4 mm (MD ± SD = −15.2 ± 30.4, 95% CI [−30.8 to 0.43]). The sensitivity, specificity, and cutoff values of the GBG measurements for detecting diabetes were 80%, 93%, and 123.5 mg/dL, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and cutoff values of the FTBG measurements for detecting diabetes were 73%, 87%, and 134.0 mg/dL, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the AUCs (0.078, 95% CI [−0.006 to 0.161]). Conclusions The GBG measurements aligned with the FTBG measurements in the patients with diabetes and among the participants with a PPD of ≥4 mm. Patients with diabetes were more likely to have a PPD of ≥4 mm at the sampled site, GBG levels can be used to screen for type 2 diabetes in dental clinics.
Keywords
