6533b825fe1ef96bd1281edf
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Diagnostic accuracy of clinical parameters to monitor peri-implant conditions: A matched case-control study
David PeñarrochaMia RakicMia RakicJosé NartAlberto MonjeAlberto MonjeHom-lay WangJordi Caballé-serranosubject
medicine.medical_specialtyPeri-implant mucositisdiagnosisBleeding on probingperiodontal diseaseLogistic regressionGastroenterology03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineProbing pocket depthPeri-implant mucositisInternal medicineStatistical significance0502 economics and businessDiagnosismedicineMucositisHumansMedical diagnosisPeri-implantitisperi-implant diseasesPeri-implant diseasesGeneralized estimating equationDental Implants[SDV.MHEP.RSOA] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology/Rhumatology and musculoskeletal systemStomatitis[SDV.MHEP.GEG] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology/Geriatry and gerontologybusiness.industry[SDV.MHEP.GEG]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology/Geriatry and gerontology05 social sciencesCase-control study030206 dentistrymedicine.diseasePrognosisperi-implant mucositis3. Good health[SDV.MHEP.RSOA]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology/Rhumatology and musculoskeletal systemCase-Control Studiesprobing pocket depthPeriodontics050211 marketingprognosisPeriodontal Indexmedicine.symptomPeriodontal diseasebusinessperi-implantitisdescription
International audience; Background: The aim of this case-control study was to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the standard clinical parameters in diagnosing healthy peri-implant tissues, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis.Methods: A case-control study was designed to compare the clinical parameters used in the diagnosis of peri-implant diseases such as: probingdepth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), mucosal redness (MR), suppuration (SUP), and plaque index (PI). Furthermore, the influence of patient-(sex, age) and implant-related variables (implant neck configuration, time in function after loading) were evaluated to investigate the association with the clinical findings. The inferential analysis consisted of estimation by generalized estimating equations (GEE) of multilevel logistic regression models.Results: In total, 1,572 sites were evaluated around 262 implants from 141 patients. Sites with implant mucositis showed significant levels of BOP (OR = 3.56), MR (OR = 7.66) and PD (OR = 1.48) compared to healthy sites. The specificity was 90.3% while the sensitivity was only 43.6%. Likewise, sites exhibiting peri-implantitis showed significant levels of BOP (OR = 2.32), MR (OR = 7.21), PD (OR = 2.43) and SUP (OR = 6.81) compared to healthy sites. Again, the multiple logistic regressions showed high specificity (92.1%) but modest sensitivity (52.5%). PD was the only diagnostic marker displaying significance comparing peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis sites (OR = 1.76). Moreover, tissue-level compared to bone-level implants were less associated with SUP+ (OR = 0.20), and PI (OR = 0.36) and demonstrated statistical significance. In addition, age, sex, and function time significantly influenced the tested clinical parameters.Conclusions: The diagnosis of peri-implant diseases cannot rely solely upon individual clinical parameters but rather require a combination of criteria. The clinical parameters, particularly probing depth, might accurately discern between diagnosesamong peri-implant conditions. Nevertheless, the specificity of the clinical parameters surpasses the sensitivity in the detection of peri-implant diseases, validating itspotential use as a diagnostic tool.
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-01-01 |