PURPOSE: Cigarette smoking is a major risk factor in periodontal diseases. The pathogenesis of periodontal diseases may be affected by alterations of the inflammatory response by smoke. Nitric oxide (NO) is a gaseous, colorless, highly reactive, short-lived free radical with a pivotal role in the regulation of various physiological and pathological mechanisms in the body. It is important in host defense and homeostasis, on the one hand, whereas, on the other hand, it modulates the inflammatory response in periodontitis, leading to harmful effects. The aim of this study was to assess the levels of NO in both the serum and saliva of smokers and nonsmokers having chronic periodontitis and to compare them with periodontally healthy controls. METHODS: Sixty subjects participated in the study and were divided into three groups: group I, healthy nonsmoking subjects; group II, nonsmoking patients with chronic periodontitis; group III, smoking patients with chronic periodontitis. Each group consisted of twenty subjects. The biochemical estimation of NO in the collected serum and in the saliva was performed using the Griess colorimetric reaction. RESULTS: The results showed that the mean value of the salivary and serum NO was greater in group II than in group I, and also greater in group III than in group II. CONCLUSIONS: NO appears to play an important and rather complex role in the immuno-inflammatory process and in the remodeling and maintenance of osseous structures. It is therefore logical that modulation of this mediator has potential for the treatment of a number of inflammatory conditions including periodontal disease.
Chronic Periodontitis* ; Colorimetry ; Homeostasis ; Humans ; Nitric Oxide* ; Periodontal Diseases ; Periodontitis ; Risk Factors ; Saliva ; Smoke ; Smoking

Methods: In a double-blinded setup, 124 patients randomly received either of the following injections: 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine, 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine mixed with 2 mg dexamethasone, or plain 2% lidocaine mixed with 2 mg dexamethasone, which were injected as a primary IANB. Ten minutes after injection, patients with profound lip numbness underwent electric and thermal pulp sensibility tests. Patients who responded positively to the tests were categorized as “failed” anesthesia and received supplemental anesthesia. The remaining patients underwent endodontic treatment using a rubber dam. Anesthetic success was defined as “no pain or faint/weak/mild pain” during endodontic access preparation and instrumentation (HP visual analog scale score < 55 mm). The effect of the anesthetic solutions on the maximum change in heart rate was also evaluated. The Pearson chi-square test at 5% and 1% significance was used to analyze anesthetic success rates. Results: The 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine, 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine mixed with 2 mg dexamethasone, and plain 2% lidocaine mixed with 2 mg dexamethasone groups had anesthetic success rates of 34%, 59%, and 29%, respectively. The addition of dexamethasone resulted in significantly better results (P < 0.001, χ 2 = 9.07, df = 2). Conclusions The addition of dexamethasone to 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, administered as an IANB, can improve the anesthetic success rates during the endodontic management of symptomatic mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis.