Suppr超能文献

在缺乏基线数据的情况下诊断种植体周围炎:一项诊断准确性研究。

Diagnosis of peri-implantitis in the absence of baseline data: A diagnostic accuracy study.

机构信息

Section of Graduate Periodontology, Faculty of Odontology, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain.

Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

出版信息

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Mar;32(3):297-313. doi: 10.1111/clr.13700. Epub 2021 Feb 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and radiographic evaluations made at a single time point during follow-up in identifying (a) a history of peri-implant bone loss and (b) the presence of peri-implantitis.

MATERIAL & METHODS: 427 patients provided with implant-supported reconstructions 9 years earlier were evaluated clinically by Probing Pocket Depth, Bleeding or Suppuration on Probing (PPD, BoP & SoP) and radiographically. Bone levels were assessed relative to the most coronal point of the intra-osseous part of the implant. A history of bone loss and diagnosis of peri-implantitis was confirmed through baseline documentation (direct evidence). Diagnostic accuracy of radiographic bone levels at 9 years and clinical findings (indirect evidence/secondary case definition) in identifying a history of bone loss and peri-implantitis were evaluated through correlation and multilevel regression analyses as well as receiver operating characteristic curves. Results were expressed as sensitivity/specificity and area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Bone levels observed at 9 years were highly accurate in identifying pronounced bone loss (>2 mm; AUC = 0.96; 95% CI 0.95-0.98). In the absence of baseline documentation, a secondary case definition based on the presence of BoP/SoP & bone level ≥ 1 mm (indirect evidence) provided the overall best diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.80; 95% CI 0.77-0.82) in identifying peri-implantitis cases (direct evidence: BoP/SoP & bone loss > 0.5 mm). Moderate/severe peri-implantitis (BoP/SoP & bone loss > 2 mm) was most accurately identified by the combination of BoP/SoP & bone level ≥ 2 mm (AUC = 0.93; 95% CI 0.91-0.96). Sensitivity of the secondary case definition suggested by the 2017 World Workshop of Periodontology (WWP) (BoP/SoP ≥ 1 site & bone level ≥ 3 mm & PPD ≥ 6 mm) was low.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results underline the importance of baseline documentation for the correct diagnosis of peri-implantitis, especially in its early/incipient forms. The secondary case definition of peri-implantitis suggested at the 2017 WWP demonstrated a high level of specificity but low sensitivity. Moderate/severe peri-implantitis was most accurately identified by the combination of BoP/SoP & bone level ≥ 2 mm.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估在随访过程中单次评估的临床和影像学表现对(a)种植体周围骨丧失史和(b)种植体周围炎的诊断准确性。

材料与方法

9 年前为 427 名患者植入了种植体支持的修复体,通过探诊袋深度、探诊时出血或溢脓(PPD、BoP 和 SoP)以及影像学检查进行临床评估。骨水平相对于种植体骨内部分的最冠部点进行评估。通过基线记录(直接证据)确认骨丧失史和种植体周围炎的诊断。通过相关性和多层次回归分析以及受试者工作特征曲线评估 9 年后的放射学骨水平和临床发现(间接证据/二级病例定义)在识别骨丧失史和种植体周围炎方面的诊断准确性。结果以灵敏度/特异性和曲线下面积(AUC)表示。

结果

9 年后观察到的骨水平在识别明显骨丧失(>2mm;AUC=0.96;95%CI 0.95-0.98)方面具有高度准确性。在没有基线记录的情况下,基于探诊时出血或溢脓和骨水平≥1mm(间接证据)的二级病例定义提供了诊断种植体周围炎病例的总体最佳诊断准确性(AUC=0.80;95%CI 0.77-0.82)(直接证据:探诊时出血或溢脓和骨丧失>0.5mm)。中度/重度种植体周围炎(探诊时出血或溢脓和骨丧失>2mm)通过探诊时出血或溢脓和骨水平≥2mm的组合(AUC=0.93;95%CI 0.91-0.96)最准确地识别。2017 年牙周病世界工作会议(WWP)提出的二级病例定义(探诊时出血或溢脓≥1 个部位且骨水平≥3mm 且探诊深度≥6mm)的敏感性较低。

结论

本研究结果强调了基线记录对正确诊断种植体周围炎,尤其是早期/初期种植体周围炎的重要性。2017 年牙周病世界工作会议提出的种植体周围炎二级病例定义特异性高,但敏感性低。中度/重度种植体周围炎最准确地通过探诊时出血或溢脓和骨水平≥2mm 的组合来识别。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验