牙周炎患者活动度对长期拔牙/掉牙风险的影响。系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of periodontal research Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI:10.1111/jre.13286
Matteo Peditto, Cosimo Rupe, Giorgia Gambino, Maria Di Martino, Luigi Barbato, Francesco Cairo, Giacomo Oteri, Raffaele Cavalcanti
{"title":"牙周炎患者活动度对长期拔牙/掉牙风险的影响。系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Matteo Peditto, Cosimo Rupe, Giorgia Gambino, Maria Di Martino, Luigi Barbato, Francesco Cairo, Giacomo Oteri, Raffaele Cavalcanti","doi":"10.1111/jre.13286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to assess whether tooth mobility (TM) increases the risk of tooth extraction/loss. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42023485425). The focused PECO questions were as follows: (1) \"In patients with periodontitis, undergoing periodontal treatment, are teeth affected by mobility at higher risk of being extracted/lost compared to non-mobile teeth, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?\" and (2) \"In these patients, does varying degrees of tooth mobility increase the risk of tooth extraction/loss, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?\". Results were reported according to PRISMA statement. Electronic and manual searches were conducted to identify longitudinal studies. The different assessments of tooth mobility were pooled into three groups: TM0: Undetectable tooth mobility, TM1: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility ≤1 mm, TM2: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility >1 mm or vertical tooth mobility. Tooth loss was the primary outcome. Various meta-analyses were conducted, including subgroup analyses considering different follow-up lengths and the timing of TM assessment, along with sensitivity analyses. A trial sequential analysis was also performed. Eleven studies were included (1883 patients). The mean follow-up range was 10-25 years. The weighted total of included teeth, based on the sample size, was 18 918, with a total of 1604 (8.47%) extracted/lost teeth. The overall rate of tooth extraction/loss increased with increasing mobility: TM0 was associated with a 5.85% rate (866/14822), TM1 with the 11.8% (384/3255), TM2 with the 40.3% (339/841). Mobile teeth (TM1/TM2) were at an increased risk for tooth extraction/loss, compared to TM0 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 1.88-4.32]; p < .00001). TM1 had a higher risk than TM0 (HR: 1.96; [95% CI 1.09-3.53]; p < .00001). TM2 had a higher risk than TM1 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 2.19-3.70]; p < .00001) and TM0 (HR: 7.12; [95% CI 3.27-15.51]; p < .00001). The results of the tests for subgroup differences were not significant. Sensitivity meta-analyses yielded consistent results with other meta-analyses. Within the limits of the quality of the studies included in the meta-analyses, mobile teeth were at higher risk of being extracted/lost in the long-term and higher degrees of TM significantly influenced clinicians' decision to extract a tooth. However, most teeth can be retained in the long-term and thus TM should not be considered a reason for extraction or a risk factor for tooth loss, regardless of the degree of TM.</p>","PeriodicalId":16715,"journal":{"name":"Journal of periodontal research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of mobility on the long-term risk of tooth extraction/loss in periodontitis patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Matteo Peditto, Cosimo Rupe, Giorgia Gambino, Maria Di Martino, Luigi Barbato, Francesco Cairo, Giacomo Oteri, Raffaele Cavalcanti\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jre.13286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to assess whether tooth mobility (TM) increases the risk of tooth extraction/loss. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42023485425). The focused PECO questions were as follows: (1) \\\"In patients with periodontitis, undergoing periodontal treatment, are teeth affected by mobility at higher risk of being extracted/lost compared to non-mobile teeth, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?\\\" and (2) \\\"In these patients, does varying degrees of tooth mobility increase the risk of tooth extraction/loss, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?\\\". Results were reported according to PRISMA statement. Electronic and manual searches were conducted to identify longitudinal studies. The different assessments of tooth mobility were pooled into three groups: TM0: Undetectable tooth mobility, TM1: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility ≤1 mm, TM2: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility >1 mm or vertical tooth mobility. Tooth loss was the primary outcome. Various meta-analyses were conducted, including subgroup analyses considering different follow-up lengths and the timing of TM assessment, along with sensitivity analyses. A trial sequential analysis was also performed. Eleven studies were included (1883 patients). The mean follow-up range was 10-25 years. The weighted total of included teeth, based on the sample size, was 18 918, with a total of 1604 (8.47%) extracted/lost teeth. The overall rate of tooth extraction/loss increased with increasing mobility: TM0 was associated with a 5.85% rate (866/14822), TM1 with the 11.8% (384/3255), TM2 with the 40.3% (339/841). Mobile teeth (TM1/TM2) were at an increased risk for tooth extraction/loss, compared to TM0 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 1.88-4.32]; p < .00001). TM1 had a higher risk than TM0 (HR: 1.96; [95% CI 1.09-3.53]; p < .00001). TM2 had a higher risk than TM1 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 2.19-3.70]; p < .00001) and TM0 (HR: 7.12; [95% CI 3.27-15.51]; p < .00001). The results of the tests for subgroup differences were not significant. Sensitivity meta-analyses yielded consistent results with other meta-analyses. Within the limits of the quality of the studies included in the meta-analyses, mobile teeth were at higher risk of being extracted/lost in the long-term and higher degrees of TM significantly influenced clinicians' decision to extract a tooth. However, most teeth can be retained in the long-term and thus TM should not be considered a reason for extraction or a risk factor for tooth loss, regardless of the degree of TM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of periodontal research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of periodontal research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.13286\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of periodontal research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.13286","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述(SR)旨在评估牙齿移动性(TM)是否会增加拔牙/脱落的风险。研究方案已在 PROSPERO 数据库(CRD42023485425)中注册。重点 PECO 问题如下(1) "在接受牙周治疗的牙周炎患者中,与不移动的牙齿相比,受移动影响的牙齿被拔除/脱落的风险是否更高?"和(2) "在这些患者中,不同程度的牙齿移动是否会增加拔牙/脱落的风险?结果按照 PRISMA 声明进行报告。为确定纵向研究,我们进行了电子和人工搜索。将不同的牙齿活动度评估结果汇总为三组:TM0:检测不到牙齿移动;TM1:水平/中轴移动≤1 mm;TM2:水平/中轴移动>1 mm或垂直牙齿移动。牙齿脱落是主要结果。研究人员进行了各种荟萃分析,包括考虑不同随访时间和TM评估时间的亚组分析,以及敏感性分析。此外,还进行了试验顺序分析。共纳入 11 项研究(1883 名患者)。平均随访时间为 10-25 年。根据样本量,纳入的加权牙齿总数为 18 918 颗,拔牙/缺失牙齿总数为 1604 颗(8.47%)。牙齿拔除/脱落的总比率随着活动度的增加而增加:TM0 的拔牙率为 5.85%(866/14822),TM1 为 11.8%(384/3255),TM2 为 40.3%(339/841)。与 TM0 相比,活动牙(TM1/TM2)的拔牙/脱落风险更高(HR:2.85;[95% CI 1.88-4.32];p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Influence of mobility on the long-term risk of tooth extraction/loss in periodontitis patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to assess whether tooth mobility (TM) increases the risk of tooth extraction/loss. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42023485425). The focused PECO questions were as follows: (1) "In patients with periodontitis, undergoing periodontal treatment, are teeth affected by mobility at higher risk of being extracted/lost compared to non-mobile teeth, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?" and (2) "In these patients, does varying degrees of tooth mobility increase the risk of tooth extraction/loss, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years?". Results were reported according to PRISMA statement. Electronic and manual searches were conducted to identify longitudinal studies. The different assessments of tooth mobility were pooled into three groups: TM0: Undetectable tooth mobility, TM1: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility ≤1 mm, TM2: Horizontal/Mesio-distal mobility >1 mm or vertical tooth mobility. Tooth loss was the primary outcome. Various meta-analyses were conducted, including subgroup analyses considering different follow-up lengths and the timing of TM assessment, along with sensitivity analyses. A trial sequential analysis was also performed. Eleven studies were included (1883 patients). The mean follow-up range was 10-25 years. The weighted total of included teeth, based on the sample size, was 18 918, with a total of 1604 (8.47%) extracted/lost teeth. The overall rate of tooth extraction/loss increased with increasing mobility: TM0 was associated with a 5.85% rate (866/14822), TM1 with the 11.8% (384/3255), TM2 with the 40.3% (339/841). Mobile teeth (TM1/TM2) were at an increased risk for tooth extraction/loss, compared to TM0 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 1.88-4.32]; p < .00001). TM1 had a higher risk than TM0 (HR: 1.96; [95% CI 1.09-3.53]; p < .00001). TM2 had a higher risk than TM1 (HR: 2.85; [95% CI 2.19-3.70]; p < .00001) and TM0 (HR: 7.12; [95% CI 3.27-15.51]; p < .00001). The results of the tests for subgroup differences were not significant. Sensitivity meta-analyses yielded consistent results with other meta-analyses. Within the limits of the quality of the studies included in the meta-analyses, mobile teeth were at higher risk of being extracted/lost in the long-term and higher degrees of TM significantly influenced clinicians' decision to extract a tooth. However, most teeth can be retained in the long-term and thus TM should not be considered a reason for extraction or a risk factor for tooth loss, regardless of the degree of TM.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of periodontal research
Journal of periodontal research 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
103
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Periodontal Research is an international research periodical the purpose of which is to publish original clinical and basic investigations and review articles concerned with every aspect of periodontology and related sciences. Brief communications (1-3 journal pages) are also accepted and a special effort is made to ensure their rapid publication. Reports of scientific meetings in periodontology and related fields are also published. One volume of six issues is published annually.
期刊最新文献
Transcriptome Analysis of Porphyromonas gingivalis Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Early Gene Expression in Human Gingival Keratinocytes. Periodontal Ligament Reactions to Orthodontic Force: A Transcriptomic Study on Maxillary and Mandibular Human Premolars. The influence of hydrogen sulfide on gingival wound healing: An in vitro study. Phthalocyanine derivative attenuates TNF-α production in macrophage culture and prevents alveolar bone loss in experimental periodontitis. Periodontitis and risk of mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1