Dentistry

Snuff Use May Increase the Risk for Heart Failure?

Posted on
Share

Yes, according to a new study.

Use of smokeless tobacco (or snuff) may increase the risk for heart failure, mainly of nonischemic origin and chiefly by increasing blood pressure and heart rate, a Swedish study found.

When adjusted for age, the use of smokeless tobacco among a cohort of older men was associated with a more than twofold risk of developing heart failure compared with non-users (HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.37 to 4.27), according to Gabriel Arefalk, MD, of Uppsala University Hospital in Uppsala, Sweden, and colleagues.

When further adjusted for current smoking dose, pack-years of smoking, diabetes, body mass index, occupational classification, alcohol use, and myocardial infarction before baseline, the use of snuff resulted in a hazard ratio of 2.08 (95% CI 1.03 to 4.22), they reported online in the European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation.

The researchers noted the increased use of smokeless tobacco in Scandinavia, but also pointed out that the U.S. is the world’s largest snuff market, with an annual growth rate of 6%.

Ugh! While tobacco smoking rate is decreasing or stable in the United States, smokeless tobacco IS increasing.

While tobacoo consumers may bypass the deleterious atherogenic effects of smoking, the harmful effects of nicotine remain.

“Smokeless administration of tobacco may indeed circumvent the atherogenic effects of smoked tobacco, but it is possible that the potent autonomic and hemodynamic effects of nicotine per se are detrimental for cardiovascular tissues,” Arefalk and colleagues wrote.

In particular, smokeless tobacco “increases epinephrine levels, impairs endothelial function, and increases blood pressure and heart rate.”

Just say NO to the use of tobacco products.

They ARE harmful to your health!

Share
Dentistry

Pediatricians Issue Warnings About Energy and Sports Drinks for Children

Posted on
Share

Common energy drinks

The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued warnings about the appropriateness of sports and energy drinks in this paper. Here is the abstract.

Clinical Report—Sports Drinks and Energy Drinks for Children and Adolescents: Are They Appropriate?

    COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION AND THE COUNCIL ON SPORTS MEDICINE AND FITNESS

Abstract

Sports and energy drinks are being marketed to children and adolescents for a wide variety of inappropriate uses. Sports drinks and energy drinks are significantly different products, and the terms should not be used interchangeably. The primary objectives of this clinical report are to define the ingredients of sports and energy drinks, categorize the similarities and differences between the products, and discuss misuses and abuses. Secondary objectives are to encourage screening during annual physical examinations for sports and energy drink use, to understand the reasons why youth consumption is widespread, and to improve education aimed at decreasing or eliminating the inappropriate use of these beverages by children and adolescents. Rigorous review and analysis of the literature reveal that caffeine and other stimulant substances contained in energy drinks have no place in the diet of children and adolescents. Furthermore, frequent or excessive intake of caloric sports drinks can substantially increase the risk for overweight or obesity in children and adolescents. Discussion regarding the appropriate use of sports drinks in the youth athlete who participates regularly in endurance or high-intensity sports and vigorous physical activity is beyond the scope of this report.

It is important to differentiate between energy drinks which contain a goodly amount of caffeine and other stimulants and sports drinks which contain sugar and electrolytes. I guess use is a matter of moderation and if the child is an athlete for sports drinks.

Sports and energy drinks are hugely popular with kids. But the nation’s pediatricians are not such big fans. They’re now telling kids to lay off the energy drinks, and to use sports drinks only when they really need them — like when they’re playing sports.

A new clinical report from the American Academy of Pediatrics warns that energy drinks, or any other drink with caffeine, should be off limits to children and teenagers. That includes colas and coffee drinks.

But the doctors are particularly worried about energy drinks, particularly since they often contain high levels of caffeine and other stimulants, and that’s often not clear on the label. The pediatricians say energy drinks often get confused with sports drinks, which generally don’t have caffeine.
 
Caffeine not only interferes with sleep, it can cause anxiety, raise heartbeats, and increase the risk of dehydration. “There’s great concern about what [caffeine] does over time or in high doses to a young, growing body that’s not fully mature,” says Dr. Holly Benjamin. She is a pediatric sports medicine specialist at the University of Chicago, and coauthor of the new report, which was published in Pediatrics. “It’s almost like a stress to your body.”

Sports drinks don’t have that problem, but they do have sugar as the primary ingredient. That causes another problem. “Kids will drink a Gatorade after school,” Benjamin says. “They’ll drink a Gatorade at lunch. They’ll drink a Gatorade with dinner.”

All that sugar can contribute to obesity and tooth decay, the pediatricians say. Instead, children and teenagers should be drinking water, and lots of it. They also should be drinking two glasses of low-fat milk daily (lots of good protein, vitamin D, and calcium), and perhaps one or two glasses of juice. Benjamin says: “Other than that it’s water, water, water.”

I would always err on the side of caution – no energy drinks, soda or coffee for children. And, sports drinks in moderation, and if in doubt, then use the no sugar sports drinks.

Children have enough energy and really don’t need the sugar, citric acid and caffeine.

Share
Dentistry

Homeless NOT Toothless Celebrates 20th Anniversary

Posted on
Share

Actess Sharon Stone, Board Member

What a wonderful organization.

Homeless Not Toothless, run by Brentwood dentist Jay Grossman, is celebrating its 20th year of providing pro-bono dental care to the homeless and poor of Los Angeles. Highlights during the organization’s 20 years:

  • Over $2 million dollars of pro-bono dental care through the dental office of Dr. Jay Grossman in Brentwood
  • Over 3-dozen volunteer dentists in the Los Angeles community in addition to Dr. Grossman’s services
  • Sharon Stone, actress and philanthropist, as a board member
  • Expansion to treating homeless and foster children with a satellite clinic being constructed in the city of El Monte to treat the 28,000 children in foster care.

Congratulations and many more years of success.

Share
Dentistry

New Pathogen Linked to Severe Early Childhood Tooth Decay Identified

Posted on
Share

Early childhood caries

So say researchers at The Forsyth Institute.

Researchers at The Forsyth Institute have made a significant discovery about the nature of childhood dental disease. The scientific studies led by Anne Tanner, BDS, Ph.D., identified a new pathogen connected to severe early childhood caries (cavities). This bacterium, Scardovia wiggsiae, was present in the mouths of children with severe early childhood caries when other known pathogens such as Streptococcus mutans were not detected. This research may offer the potential to intervene and halt the progression of disease.

Early childhood caries, ECC, is the most common chronic infectious disease of childhood in the United States. Severe ECC can destroy primary teeth, cause painful abscesses and is the major reason for hospital visits for young children. This condition disproportionately affects disadvantaged socio-economic groups. This research, which will be published in the April issue of Journal of Clinical Microbiology, provides new insight on the microbiota of severe early childhood caries.

There is nothing more heartbreaking than a young child with rampant dental disease. Identification of this pathogen will hopefully lead to more effective treatment.

Share
Dentistry

Oral Bisphosphonates Associated with a SLIGHTLY Elevated Risk of Developing Osteonecrosis of the Jaw?

Posted on
Share

Yes, according to a new study: ONJ in Two Dental Practice-Based Research Network Regions published in the Journal of Dental Research. The abstract is here.

The incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in the population is low, but specifics are unknown. Potential risk factors include bisphosphonate treatment, steroid treatment, osteoporosis, and head/neck radiation. This Dental Practice-Based Research Network study estimated ONJ incidence and odds ratios from bisphosphonate exposure and other risk factors using a key word search and manual chart reviews of electronic records for adults aged ≥ 35 yrs enrolled during 1995–2006 in two large health-care organizations. We found 16 ONJ cases among 572,606 cohort members; seven additional cases were identified through dental plan resources. Among 23 cases (0.63 per 100,000 patient years), 20 (87%) had at least one risk factor, and six (26%) had received oral bisphosphonates. Patients with oral bisphosphonates were 15.5 (CI, 6.0–38.7) more likely to have ONJ than non-exposed patients; however, the sparse number of ONJ cases limits firm conclusions and suggests that the absolute risks for ONJ from oral bisphosphonates is low.

From the press release:

Why this study is newsworthy:

  • Osteonecrosis of the jaw is difficult to treat and occurs when blood flow to the bone is reduced, leaving an area of the jaw bone exposed for longer than six to eight weeks.
  • According to a 2009 paper in the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 4.7 million Americans are taking oral bisphosphonates.
  • The study examined medical records from nearly 600,000 patients and is part of the Dental Practice-Based Research Network — a consortium of participating practices and dental organizations committed to advancing knowledge of dental practice and ways to improve it.

The entire press release follows:

A commonly prescribed osteoporosis drug is associated with a slightly elevated risk of developing the rare, but serious condition, osteonecrosis of the jaw; nonetheless the risk remains extremely low.  These findings are published online in the Journal of Dental Research, the official journal of the International and American Associations for Dental Research.  Although the findings are provocative, study authors say they should be carefully considered against the large benefit of these drugs to prevent and treat osteoporosis.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and conducted by researchers from the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research and HealthPartners Research Foundation. The study examined medical records from nearly 600,000 patients and is part of the Dental Practice-Based Research Network — a consortium of participating practices and dental organizations committed to advancing knowledge of dental practice and ways to improve it.

“Oral bisphosphonates, usually prescribed for osteoporosis patients, appear to increase the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw, but the risk is still very low,” said the paper’s lead author, Jeffrey Fellows, PhD, an investigator with the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research. “Previous studies suggested that about one percent of oral bisphosphonate users may develop osteonecrosis of the jaw, but our study found a much lower rate, less than one-tenth of one percent. The risk is still real and patients should take necessary precautions, but they shouldn’t be alarmed.”

“These drugs are very helpful in treating osteoporosis and preventing fractures so for the large majority of patients the benefits of taking them far outweigh the small risk found in this study,” says Michael Herson, MD, Chief of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Northwest Permanente Medical Group, which was not involved in the study.  “If patients have questions about taking these drugs they should consult with their physicians.”

Osteonecrosis of the jaw is difficult to treat and occurs when blood flow to the bone is reduced, leaving an area of the jaw bone exposed for longer than 6-8 weeks.  Most cases have been reported in cancer patients taking intravenous bisphosphonates; the risk associated with oral bisphosphonates is less clear. This study attempts to quantify that risk in a large, defined population. It is important to establish what the risk is because bisphosphonates are widely prescribed to osteoporosis patients. According to a 2009 paper in the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 4.7 million Americans are taking oral bisphosphonates.

The new paper published in the Journal of Dental Research examined electronic medical records of 572,606 patients from 1995 to 2006. Researchers found 23 cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw, most among patients who were not taking oral bisphosphonates, but had other risk factors including cancer, head and neck radiation therapy, and osteoporosis.

Nearly 4 percent of the patients, or 21,164 people, were prescribed oral bisphosphonates, but only six of those patients, or about one in 3,500, developed osteonecrosis of the jaw. Patients taking oral bisphosphonates were nine times more likely than those who didn’t to develop the condition.

“Invasive dental procedures may also increase the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw, so patients who need those procedures may want to get them before starting on oral bisphosphonates,” said Dr. Daniel Pihlstrom, a co-author on the study and associate director for Evidence Based Care and Oral Health Research at Permanente Dental Associates.  “Patients who are already taking these drugs don’t need to stop in order to get dental care, but if they need an invasive dental procedure they should inform their dentist or oral surgeon that they are taking the drugs,” added Pihlstrom.

The authors caution that their confidence in the association between oral bisphosphonates and osteonecrosis of the jaw is limited because they found so few cases. The small number of cases also limited their ability to control for other risk factors.  Also, since osteonecrosis of the jaw did not have a diagnosis code before 2007, the authors used a computer program to search medical records for any diagnosis, procedure, or physician chart note that could indicate a possible case. Manual chart review was used to confirm osteonecrosis of the jaw among patients identified by the computer. Some additional cases were found through conversations with general dentists and oral surgeons serving patients from each health care organization. While the search was extensive, there is a chance that some cases were missed.

The study was supported by grants DE-16746 and DE-16747 from the National Institutes of Health. Authors of the paper include Jeffrey L. Fellows, PhD, and Christine M. Gullion, PhD, from the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research in Portland, Ore.;  Daniel J. Pihlstrom, DDS, with Permanente Dental Associates in Portland; D. Brad Rindal, DDS, and William Rush, PhD, with HealthPartners Research Foundation in Minneapolis; Andrei Barasch, DMD, MDSc., with the Department of General Dental Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham; and Joshua Richman, MD, PhD, with the Division of Preventive Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

This is better news for patients (low incidence of jaw osteonecrosis) taking oral bisphosphonates than the 2009 study which I posted here.

However, it is wise for patients and dentists to be prudent: Flap urges caution for patients taking ORAL Bisphosphonate medications. And,please patients update your health history and tell your dentist if you are using these drugs.

Previous:

New Dentistry Cause for Alarm for Patients Who Use Bisphosphonates – Fosamax, Actonel, Boniva?

Dentistry Today: Bisphosphonates: Zometa (zoledronic acid) & Aredia (pamidronate disodium) Associated with Osteonecrosis of Jaw – REDUX

Bisphosphonates: Zometa (zoledronic acid) & Aredia (pamidronate dis odium) Associated with Osteonecrosis of Jaw

Share