Plain Language Summary
This review mapped the current evidence on antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) as potential treatments for gum disease, examining 21 studies including lab experiments, animal studies, and three clinical trials. LL-37 was the most commonly studied peptide, and various delivery methods including gels, sprays, and nanoparticles showed strong activity against gum disease-causing bacteria and promoted tissue healing in early-stage studies. However, clinical data in humans remains very limited, and the authors call for well-designed human trials to bridge the gap between promising lab results and real-world treatment.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are gaining attention as adjunctive agents in periodontal therapy due to their antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and host-modulatory properties. Their potential adjunctive applications include use as local drug delivery agents, topical pastes, gels or mouthrinses, reinforcements of membranes or implant surfaces, and other applications. While numerousand animal studies have investigated their utility, the evidence remains scattered, with no comprehensive synthesis available.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to map the existing available evidence on AMPs in periodontal therapy, focusing on AMP types, delivery systems, and reported biological, microbiological, and clinical outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted across Medline-PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for studies published in the past 20 years. Studies were included if they evaluated AMPs for periodontal therapyor. The key data extracted included the type of AMP, study model, outcomes, and conclusions. The review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
RESULTS: A total of 21 studies were included, comprising 13studies, 5 animal studies, and 3 clinical studies. The commonly investigated AMP was LL-37. Delivery systems ranged from gels, spays, nanoparticles, and conjugates. Included studies reported significant antimicrobial activity against various periodontal pathogens. Preclinical models and clinical models showed enhanced healing and tissue regeneration. However, variability in experimental design, AMP concentrations, and outcome measures limits comparability across various designs.
CONCLUSION: The existing literature proves AMPs to be a promising therapeutic adjunct in periodontal applications. Clinical data, however, are lacking. Bridging the gap between experimental findings and clinical application requires robust translational research, including well-designed human trials, to evaluate safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes. This scoping review serves as a foundational reference for guiding future studies toward the clinical integration of AMPs in periodontal therapy.
Authors
Patil, Nikita D; Haran, Sneha R; Deshmukh, Ankita V; Shetty, Arvind; Shetty, Gaurav P