O'Reilly P G, Claffey N M
Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Curr Opin Periodontol. 1996;3:68-77.
Our present method for clinical evaluation of marginal periodontal tissues involves examination for bleeding and suppuration and the measurement of probing depth. There is little doubt that this method provides useful guidelines for evaluation of the overall periodontal status of dentitions. On an individual-site basis, however, it has limitations in the identification of locations prone to disease progression. So far, there is no reliably clinical, microbiologic, or other method to predict or identify sites with disease activity (i.e., ongoing loss of attachment). Therefore, there are no clear guidelines for distinguishing between active and arrested lesions. A treatment resulting in a plaque-free mouth with nonbleeding and shallow probing depths throughout the dentition will reduce the risk of residual, active disease. Such a result, although desirable, is not realistic for many patients. Therefore, the clinician is faced with the delicate task of evaluating sites with various grades of involvement using current clinical methods of examination.
我们目前用于临床评估边缘牙周组织的方法包括检查出血和化脓情况以及测量探诊深度。毫无疑问,这种方法为评估牙列的整体牙周状况提供了有用的指导方针。然而,在个体部位的基础上,它在识别易发生疾病进展的部位方面存在局限性。到目前为止,还没有可靠的临床、微生物学或其他方法来预测或识别具有疾病活动(即正在发生附着丧失)的部位。因此,对于区分活动性病损和静止性病损,尚无明确的指导方针。一种能使全口无菌斑、无出血且探诊深度浅的治疗方法将降低残留活动性疾病的风险。这样的结果虽然理想,但对许多患者来说并不现实。因此,临床医生面临着一项微妙的任务,即使用当前的临床检查方法评估不同受累程度的部位。