Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs).

Autor: De Ry SP; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland., Roccuzzo A; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital (Rigshospitalet), Copenhagen, Denmark., Lang NP; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland., Heitz-Mayfield LJ; International Research Collaborative, Faculty of Science, The University of Western Australia, Perth, West Perth, Australia., Ramseier CA; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland., Sculean A; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland., Salvi GE; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Clinical oral implants research [Clin Oral Implants Res] 2021 Nov; Vol. 32 (11), pp. 1299-1307. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Aug 23.
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13828
Abstrakt: 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.
(© 2021 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: