The Impact of Electronic Cigarettes (e-Cigs) Smoking Habit on Periodontal Status and Salivary pH among Some Passive e-Cigs Smokers Referred to the College of Dentistry Clinics, King Khalid University

Background: Electronic cigarette (e-cigs) smoking is substitutional to traditional cigarette smoking to reduce the dangerous combustion of products. Moreover, passive smoking is involuntarily tobacco smoking due to the exposure to cigarette or tobacco smoke among non-smokers and due to there being little knowledge about the impact of passive e-cigs smoking on periodontal status and salivary pH. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the effect of e-cigs smoking habit on periodontal tissue and salivary pH among some passive e-cigs smokers referred to the college of dentistry clinics, King Khalid University. Material and Methods: Ninety male participants who were referred to the college of dentistry clinics at King Khalid University were included in the study. Age, gender, e-cigs smoking, and general health were recorded. The participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 30) as follows: Group I (Non-passive e-cigs smokers and non-smokers) as the control group, Group II (e-cigs users), and Group III (Passive e-cigs smokers). Salivary pH, plaque control record (PCR), gingival bleeding index (GBI), clinical attachment loss (CAL), percentage of radiographic bone loss (% RBL), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), more than 5 missing teeth due to periodontal diseases (>5 MTDP), tooth mobility (TM), furcation involvement (FI), Bite collapse (BC), and less than 20 remaining teeth (10 Opposing pairs) (L20RT) as well as HbA1c were recorded. ANOVA test was used to the comparison between Groups I, II, and III in the participants’ ages and periodontitis staging clinical findings. The mean of participants’ age groups, the mean of salivary pH values of study groups, and the periodontitis staging complexity and HbA1c were compared between groups with the ANOVA test, Tukey’s test, and the chi-square test. P-value was recorded, and less than 0.5 was considered a statistically significant difference (p < 0.5). Results: The e-cigs users group revealed higher means of PCR, GBI %RBL values, and the participants percentages of >5 MTDP, TM, FI, L20RT, and diabetes mellitus (DM) among participants compared to the passive e-cigs smokers group and control group except for the participants percentage of BC among the participants, which was higher among the control group participants. The differences were not significant in PCR, GBI, %RBL and DM (p > 0.5) and significant in >5 MTDP, TM, FI, L20RT and smoking (p < 0.05). The passive e-cigs users group showed higher means of CAL, PPD, salivary pH values as well as the participants percentages of HbA1c > 7% values compared to the e-cigs users group and control group participants. The differences were not significant in CAL and PPD (p > 0.5) and significant in the participants percentages of salivary pH values (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The e-cigs smoking habit was the cause of an increase in periodontal disease severity among the electronic smokers rather than passive e-cigs smokers, although the salivary pH was higher in the latter.