Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Artículo en Español | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1405175

RESUMEN

Resumen. Antecedentes: La clasificación de la periodontitis recientemente introducida en el World Workshop de 2017, que incorpora estadios y grados de la enfermedad, tiene por objeto vincular la clasificación de la enfermedad con los enfoques preventivos y terapéuticos, ya que no solo describe su gravedad y el alcance, sino también el grado de complejidad y el riesgo de un individuo. Por lo tanto, es necesario contar con directrices clínicas basadas en la evidencia que ofrezcan recomendaciones para tratar la periodontitis. Objetivo: El objetivo del presente proyecto fue desarrollar una Guía de Práctica Clínica (CPG, por sus siglas en inglés, clinical practice guideline) de nivel S3 para el tratamiento de la periodontitis en los estadios I-III. Material y métodos: Estas CPG S3 se elaboraron bajo los auspicios de la Federación Europea de Periodoncia (EFP), siguiendo la orientación metodológica de la Asociación de Sociedades Médico-Científicas de Alemania y la estructura Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). El proceso, riguroso y transparente, incluyó la síntesis de las investigaciones relevantes en 15 revisiones sistemáticas encargadas de manera específica, la evaluación de la calidad y la solidez de la evidencia, la formulación de recomendaciones específicas, así como lograr un acuerdo, sobre esas recomendaciones, por parte de expertos destacados y una amplia base de partes interesadas. Resultados: Estas CPG S3 abordan el tratamiento de la periodontitis (estadios I, II y III) utilizando un enfoque gradual preestablecido del tratamiento que, según el estadio de la enfermedad, debe ser incremental, incluyendo en cada caso diferentes intervenciones. Se llegó a un acuerdo sobre las recomendaciones relativas a las diferentes intervenciones, dirigidas a: i) cambios de comportamiento, control de biofilm supragingival, inflamación gingival y factores de riesgo; ii) instrumentación supragingival y subgingival, con y sin tratamientos coadyuvantes; iii) diferentes tipos de intervenciones quirúrgicas periodontales; y iv) el mantenimiento periodontal necesario para extender los beneficios a lo largo del tiempo. Conclusión: Esta Guía S3 informa a los clínicos, a los sistemas de salud, a los encargados de formular políticas sanitarias e, indirectamente, al público, sobre las modalidades disponibles y más eficaces para tratar la periodontitis y mantener una dentición sana durante toda la vida, de acuerdo con la evidencia disponible en el momento de su publicación.

2.
J Clin Periodontol ; 48(3): 378-388, 2021 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33263197

RESUMEN

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of different screening protocols for undiagnosed hyperglycaemia in a Research Network of Dental Clinics coordinated by the Spanish Society of Periodontology (SEPA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 1143 patients were included in the study. Participants filled a questionnaire considering diabetes risk factors (FINDRISC) and received a periodontal screening examination. Patients with a slightly elevated score according to the Findrisc (≥7), received a point-of-care HbA1c and were eventually referred to their physician for confirmatory diagnosis. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the performance of various predictive models with confirmed hyperglycaemia as outcome. RESULTS: From this population, 97 (8.5%) were finally diagnosed of diabetes (n = 28; 2.5%) or prediabetes (n = 69; 6.0%). When only including the results from the FINDRISC questionnaire, the model reported an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.866 (95% confidence interval - CI [0.833; 0.900]). This model significantly improved when a basic periodontal examination (EPB Code; AUC = 0.876; 95% CI [0.845: 0.906]; p = .042) or a point-of-care HbA1c were added (AUC = 0.961; 95% CI [0.941; 0.980]; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The tested protocol, combining the FINDRISC questionnaire and a point-of-care HbA1c, showed to be feasible when carried out in a dental clinic setting and was efficient to identify subjects with undiagnosed diabetes or prediabetes.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hiperglucemia , Estado Prediabético , Área Bajo la Curva , Glucemia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Humanos , Hiperglucemia/diagnóstico , Tamizaje Masivo , Estado Prediabético/diagnóstico , Estado Prediabético/epidemiología , Curva ROC , Factores de Riesgo
3.
Clin Oral Investig ; 17(1): 55-66, 2013 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22350036

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The main indication of the adjunctive use of local antimicrobials lies around situations in which the outcome of non-surgical mechanical treatment results in a limited number of residual pockets. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological effects of the subgingival application of a xanthan-based 1.5% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel (Xan-CHX), adjunctive to scaling and root planing (SRP) in localized periodontitis. METHODS: Periodontitis patients with four to ten residual (after conventional SRP) or relapsing (during supportive periodontal treatment) pockets were recruited and randomized to receive SRP plus the subgingival application of (Xan-CHX) or SRP plus a placebo gel. Supragingival plaque, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment level were evaluated with a computerized probe at baseline, and after 1, 3, and 6 months. Subgingival samples were also collected for the microbiological analysis. Statistical analysis used ANOVA and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Overall, the clinical results were better in the test group, with significant changes in BOP (between baseline and 3 months) and with a significant increase in the proportion of shallow pockets (1-3 mm) at 6 months. These results did not result in significant intergroup differences. The microbiological impact was limited in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The adjunctive use of Xan-CHX may improve, although to a limited extent, the clinical outcomes (BOP and PPD), in chronic periodontitis patients with "residual" or "relapsing" pockets, but no significant differences were detected between groups. No side effects, neither clinical nor microbiological, were detected after the use of the test product. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Adjunctive use of slow-released chlorhexidine might be considered in the management of periodontal disease and gingival inflammation to reduce the need for periodontal surgery.


Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos Locales/uso terapéutico , Clorhexidina/uso terapéutico , Raspado Dental/métodos , Periodontitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Polisacáridos Bacterianos/química , Aplanamiento de la Raíz/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Antiinfecciosos Locales/administración & dosificación , Carga Bacteriana/efectos de los fármacos , Biopelículas/efectos de los fármacos , Clorhexidina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Combinada , Placa Dental/tratamiento farmacológico , Placa Dental/microbiología , Portadores de Fármacos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Geles , Hemorragia Gingival/tratamiento farmacológico , Hemorragia Gingival/microbiología , Recesión Gingival/tratamiento farmacológico , Recesión Gingival/microbiología , Gingivitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Gingivitis/microbiología , Bacterias Gramnegativas/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Higiene Bucal/educación , Pérdida de la Inserción Periodontal/tratamiento farmacológico , Pérdida de la Inserción Periodontal/microbiología , Bolsa Periodontal/tratamiento farmacológico , Bolsa Periodontal/microbiología , Periodontitis/microbiología , Periodontitis/terapia , Placebos , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 23 Suppl 5: 22-38, 2012 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22211304

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to evaluate the scientific evidence on the efficacy in the surgical protocols designed for preserving the alveolar ridge after tooth extraction and to evaluate how these techniques affect the placement of dental implants and the final implant supported restoration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A thorough search in MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) was conducted up to February 2011. Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies with a follow-up of at least 3 months reporting changes on both the hard and soft tissues (height and/or width) of the alveolar process (mm or %) after tooth extraction were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: The screening of titles and abstracts resulted in 14 publications meeting the eligibility criteria. Data from nine of these 14 studies could be grouped in the meta-analyses. Results from the meta-analyses showed a statistically significant greater ridge reduction in bone height for control groups as compared to test groups (weighted mean differences, WMD = -1.47 mm; 95% CI [-1.982, -0.953]; P < 0.001; heterogeneity: I(2) = 13.1%; χ(2) P-value = 0.314) and a significant greater reduction in bone width for control groups compared to the test groups (WMD = -1.830 mm; 95% CI [-2.947, -0.732]; P = 0.001; heterogeneity: I(2) = 0%; χ(2) P-value = 0.837). Subgroup analysis was based on the surgical protocol used for the socket preservation (flapless/flapped, barrier membrane/no membrane, primary intention healing/no primary healing) and on the measurement method utilized to evaluate morphological changes. Meta-regression analyses demonstrated a statistically significant difference favoring the flapped subgroup in terms of bone width (meta-regression; slope = 2.26; 95% IC [1.01; 3.51]; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefit of socket preservation therapies was demonstrated resulting in significantly less vertical and horizontal contraction of the alveolar bone crest. The scientific evidence does not provide clear guidelines in regards to the type of biomaterial, or surgical procedure, although a significant positive effect of the flapped surgery was observed. There are no data available to draw conclusions on the consequences of such benefits on the long-term outcomes of implant therapy.


Asunto(s)
Pérdida de Hueso Alveolar/etiología , Pérdida de Hueso Alveolar/cirugía , Aumento de la Cresta Alveolar/métodos , Extracción Dental , Sustitutos de Huesos , Trasplante Óseo , Implantación Dental Endoósea , Implantes Dentales , Humanos , Membranas Artificiales , Cicatrización de Heridas
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA