Cargando…

Evaluation of the Association Between Periodontal Parameters, Osteoporosis and Osteopenia in Post Menopausal Women

OBJECTIVE: Different studies have reported contradictory results about the effect of osteoporosis on periodontal status. We performed this study to evaluate the periodontal status of menopausal women by methods with enough accuracy and confidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was performed base...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moeintaghavi, Amir, Pourjavad, Monireh, Dadgar, Sepideh, Tabbakh, Najmeh Shayesteh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4025424/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24910652
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Different studies have reported contradictory results about the effect of osteoporosis on periodontal status. We performed this study to evaluate the periodontal status of menopausal women by methods with enough accuracy and confidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was performed based on the evaluation of bone mineral density using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in 2010. A total of 60 patients who met the inclusion criteria were selected and divided into three groups of osteoporosis, osteopenia, and normal. Then, evaluation of periodontal markers such as pocket depth (DP), attachment loss (AL), and tooth loss (TL) was performed by a dental student. A panoramic radiography was performed for those who were suspicious of periodontal disease and bone decline. Finally, evaluation of the periodontal indexes was compared among the three groups using ANOVA with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Mean bone decline was higher in the osteoporosis group compared to the other two groups, but the difference was not significant (P=0.065). In addition, mean of plaque index (P=0.123), pocket depth (P=0.856), attachment loss (p=0.525), and tooth loss (p=0.884), the number of people with attachment loss ≥ 2millimeter (P=0.866) and the number of people with alveolar bone loss ≥ 2 millimeter (P=0.348) were not significantly different between the three groups. CONCLUSION: In this study, no significant difference was observed between the three groups in terms of plaque index, pocket depth, attachment loss, or tooth loss. However, further studies are required that could control all the possible confounding variables.