Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Retrospective assessment of patients' risk for peri-implant diseases using the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A cohort study.
de Medeiros Dantas, José Lucas; Freire, Guilherme Carlos Beiruth; Dos Santos Calderon, Patrícia; Duarte, Poliana Mendes; de Vasconcelos Gurgel, Bruno César.
Afiliação
  • de Medeiros Dantas JL; Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil.
  • Freire GCB; Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil.
  • Dos Santos Calderon P; Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil.
  • Duarte PM; Department of Periodontology, University of Florida College of Dentistry, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
  • de Vasconcelos Gurgel BC; Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res ; 2024 Aug 07.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39113398
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool was designed to assess an individual's risk of developing peri-implant diseases by evaluating and integrating multiple risk factors. This study aimed to evaluate the IDRA tool to determine the risk of developing peri-implant disease in patients rehabilitated with dental implants.

METHODS:

A retrospective observational cross-sectional study was conducted, collecting data from 92 patients with 92 selected dental implants. Data included the history of periodontitis, sites with bleeding on probing (BoP), teeth and/or implants with probing depths (PDs) ≥ 5 mm, alveolar bone loss relative to the patient's age, susceptibility to periodontitis, the frequency of supportive periodontal therapy (SPT), the distance from the restorative margin (RM) of the implant-supported prosthesis to the marginal bone crest (MBC), and factors related to the prosthesis itself. Additionally, the validated instrument periodontal risk assessment (PRA) was employed for comparison. Statistical analyses utilized Chi-square, Mann-Whitney, and ROC curve.

RESULTS:

Outcomes indicated that 62 implants (67.4%) were classified as high-risk. Among the IDRA parameters, history of periodontitis was the primary factor contributing to an increased risk (p < 0.001). IDRA revealed high sensitivity (100%) and low specificity (63%) (AUC = 0.685; 95% CI 0.554-0.816; p = 0.047), and there was a low agreement between the IDRA and PRA tools (Kappa = 0.123; p = 0.014). The peri-implant disease developed in 16 implants with 5.44 (±2.50) years of follow-up, however, no significant association was observed between the high- and low-medium risk groups and the occurrence of peri-implant diseases.

CONCLUSION:

Most of the evaluated implants presented high IDRA risk. The IDRA tool exhibited high sensitivity and low specificity; no significant association was observed between the risk profile and the development of peri-implant diseases.
Palavras-chave
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Estados Unidos