当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Periodontol. 2000
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your
feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Diagnostic methods/parameters to monitor peri‐implant conditions
Periodontology 2000 ( IF 17.5 ) Pub Date : 2024-06-25 , DOI: 10.1111/prd.12584 Alberto Monje 1, 2, 3 , Giovanni E Salvi 3
Periodontology 2000 ( IF 17.5 ) Pub Date : 2024-06-25 , DOI: 10.1111/prd.12584 Alberto Monje 1, 2, 3 , Giovanni E Salvi 3
Affiliation
The diagnostic accuracy of clinical parameters, including visual inspection and probing to monitor peri‐implant conditions, has been regarded with skepticism. Scientific evidence pointed out that primary diagnostic tools (chairside) seem to be highly specific, while their sensitivity is lower compared with their use in monitoring periodontal stability. Nonetheless, given the association between pocket depth at teeth and implant sites and the aerobic/anaerobic nature of the microbiome, it seems plausible for pocket probing depth to be indicative of disease progression or tissue stability. In addition, understanding the inflammatory nature of peri‐implant diseases, it seems reasonable to advocate that bleeding, erythema, ulceration, and suppuration might be reliable indicators of pathology. Nevertheless, single spots of bleeding on probing may not reflect peri‐implant disease, since implants are prone to exhibit bleeding related to probing force. On the other side, bleeding in smokers lacks sensitivity owing to the decreased angiogenic activity. Hence, the use of dichotomous scales on bleeding in the general population, in contrast to indices that feature profuseness and time after probing, might lead to false positive diagnoses. The definitive distinction between peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis, though, relies upon the radiographic evidence of progressive bone loss that can be assessed by means of two‐ and three‐dimensional methods. Accordingly, the objective of this review is to evaluate the existing clinical and radiographic parameters/methods to monitor peri‐implant conditions.
中文翻译:
监测种植体周围状况的诊断方法/参数
临床参数的诊断准确性,包括目视检查和监测种植体周围状况的探测,一直受到怀疑。科学证据指出,主要诊断工具(椅旁)似乎具有高度特异性,但与监测牙周稳定性的用途相比,其敏感性较低。尽管如此,考虑到牙齿和种植部位的袋深度与微生物组的需氧/厌氧性质之间的关联,袋探查深度似乎有可能表明疾病进展或组织稳定性。此外,在了解种植体周围疾病的炎症性质后,认为出血、红斑、溃疡和化脓可能是可靠的病理学指标似乎是合理的。然而,探诊时的单点出血可能并不反映种植体周围疾病,因为种植体很容易出现与探诊力相关的出血。另一方面,由于血管生成活性降低,吸烟者的出血缺乏敏感性。因此,与以大量和探诊后时间为特征的指数相比,对一般人群的出血使用二分法可能会导致假阳性诊断。然而,种植体周围粘膜炎和种植体周围炎之间的明确区别依赖于进行性骨丢失的放射学证据,可以通过二维和三维方法进行评估。因此,本次综述的目的是评估现有的监测种植体周围状况的临床和放射学参数/方法。
更新日期:2024-06-25
中文翻译:
监测种植体周围状况的诊断方法/参数
临床参数的诊断准确性,包括目视检查和监测种植体周围状况的探测,一直受到怀疑。科学证据指出,主要诊断工具(椅旁)似乎具有高度特异性,但与监测牙周稳定性的用途相比,其敏感性较低。尽管如此,考虑到牙齿和种植部位的袋深度与微生物组的需氧/厌氧性质之间的关联,袋探查深度似乎有可能表明疾病进展或组织稳定性。此外,在了解种植体周围疾病的炎症性质后,认为出血、红斑、溃疡和化脓可能是可靠的病理学指标似乎是合理的。然而,探诊时的单点出血可能并不反映种植体周围疾病,因为种植体很容易出现与探诊力相关的出血。另一方面,由于血管生成活性降低,吸烟者的出血缺乏敏感性。因此,与以大量和探诊后时间为特征的指数相比,对一般人群的出血使用二分法可能会导致假阳性诊断。然而,种植体周围粘膜炎和种植体周围炎之间的明确区别依赖于进行性骨丢失的放射学证据,可以通过二维和三维方法进行评估。因此,本次综述的目的是评估现有的监测种植体周围状况的临床和放射学参数/方法。