Loading…

Flow-cytometric analysis of lymphocyte subsets and mCD14 expression in patients with various periodontitis categories

Background: Membrane‐bound CD14 (mCD14) is expressed mainly on circulating monocytes and tissue macrophages. It is one of the receptors, which act at the recognition of lipopolysaccharides by host cells. Periodontopathic bacteria result in activation of cellular and humoral immune responses. Aim: Th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical periodontology 2001-05, Vol.28 (5), p.419-424
Main Authors: Buduneli, Nurcan, Bıçakçı, Nurgün, Keskinogˇlu, Ahmet
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Membrane‐bound CD14 (mCD14) is expressed mainly on circulating monocytes and tissue macrophages. It is one of the receptors, which act at the recognition of lipopolysaccharides by host cells. Periodontopathic bacteria result in activation of cellular and humoral immune responses. Aim: The aim of the present study was to analyze the peripheral blood mCD14 concentrations as well as cell surface markers of lymphocyte subsets in periodontitis patients of various categories. Materials and Methods: Peripheral blood samples were obtained from 22 early onset periodontitis (EOP), 10 adult periodontitis (AP) patients and 13 systemically and periodontally healthy control subjects. Three‐color flow cytometry and a panel of relevant monoclonal antibodies were used to determine the percent expression of various cell surface markers on peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). The results were tested statistically by one‐way variance analysis and Newman Keuls test. Results: No significant difference was observed between the study groups with regard to the relative counts of B‐cells, T‐cells, T‐helper, T‐cytotoxic/suppressor, activated T‐cells and natural killer cells. EOP patients expressed significantly lower level of interleukin‐2 receptor (IL‐2R) when compared with AP patients (6.08% and 19.3% respectively) (p
ISSN:0303-6979
1600-051X
DOI:10.1034/j.1600-051x.2001.028005419.x