Cargando…
Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)
AIM: To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri‐implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290928/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34388276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13828 |
_version_ | 1784749022447140864 |
---|---|
author | De Ry, Siro P. Roccuzzo, Andrea Lang, Niklaus P. Heitz‐Mayfield, Lisa J. Ramseier, Christoph A. Sculean, Anton Salvi, Giovanni E. |
author_facet | De Ry, Siro P. Roccuzzo, Andrea Lang, Niklaus P. Heitz‐Mayfield, Lisa J. Ramseier, Christoph A. Sculean, Anton Salvi, Giovanni E. |
author_sort | De Ry, Siro P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri‐implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled in a regular supportive periodontal therapy programme (SPT) for at least 5 years, 239 patients were screened. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent evaluation through the criteria of the IDRA tool. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves including 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: Seventy‐nine patients (43 males and 36 females, 8 smokers), aged on average 59.0 years (range: 40–79 years) at baseline (i.e. FDP delivery) were analysed. The calculated IDRA‐risk was in 34 patients (42.5%) a moderate risk, while 45 patients (56.3%) were considered at high IDRA‐risk. One patient categorized at low IDRA‐risk was excluded from the analysis. The AUC was 0.613 (95% CI: 0.464–0.762) if the IDRA‐risk was associated with prevalence of peri‐implantitis at the most recent follow‐up. Peri‐implantitis was diagnosed in 4 patients (12%) at moderate and in 12 patients (27%) at high IDRA‐risk, respectively. The calculated odds ratio for developing peri‐implantitis in patients with high IDRA‐risk compared with patients with moderate IDRA‐risk was 2.727 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.793–9.376). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present retrospective study, the IDRA algorithm might represent a promising tool to assess patients at moderate or high risk of developing peri‐implantitis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9290928 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92909282022-07-20 Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) De Ry, Siro P. Roccuzzo, Andrea Lang, Niklaus P. Heitz‐Mayfield, Lisa J. Ramseier, Christoph A. Sculean, Anton Salvi, Giovanni E. Clin Oral Implants Res Original Articles AIM: To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri‐implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled in a regular supportive periodontal therapy programme (SPT) for at least 5 years, 239 patients were screened. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent evaluation through the criteria of the IDRA tool. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves including 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: Seventy‐nine patients (43 males and 36 females, 8 smokers), aged on average 59.0 years (range: 40–79 years) at baseline (i.e. FDP delivery) were analysed. The calculated IDRA‐risk was in 34 patients (42.5%) a moderate risk, while 45 patients (56.3%) were considered at high IDRA‐risk. One patient categorized at low IDRA‐risk was excluded from the analysis. The AUC was 0.613 (95% CI: 0.464–0.762) if the IDRA‐risk was associated with prevalence of peri‐implantitis at the most recent follow‐up. Peri‐implantitis was diagnosed in 4 patients (12%) at moderate and in 12 patients (27%) at high IDRA‐risk, respectively. The calculated odds ratio for developing peri‐implantitis in patients with high IDRA‐risk compared with patients with moderate IDRA‐risk was 2.727 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.793–9.376). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present retrospective study, the IDRA algorithm might represent a promising tool to assess patients at moderate or high risk of developing peri‐implantitis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-23 2021-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9290928/ /pubmed/34388276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13828 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles De Ry, Siro P. Roccuzzo, Andrea Lang, Niklaus P. Heitz‐Mayfield, Lisa J. Ramseier, Christoph A. Sculean, Anton Salvi, Giovanni E. Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title | Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title_full | Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title_short | Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) |
title_sort | evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (idra) tool: a retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (fdps) |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290928/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34388276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13828 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT derysirop evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT roccuzzoandrea evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT langniklausp evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT heitzmayfieldlisaj evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT ramseierchristopha evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT sculeananton evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps AT salvigiovannie evaluationoftheimplantdiseaseriskassessmentidratoolaretrospectivestudyinpatientswithtreatedperiodontitisandimplantsupportedfixeddentalprosthesesfdps |