Loading...
Publication
Peri-implantite: prevalĂȘncia e problemas associados
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 237.47 KB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Objetivos: O objetivo deste trabalho de revisĂŁo bibliogrĂĄfica foi avaliar a prevalĂȘncia da peri-implantite, de acordo com a literatura atual, quais os critĂ©rios de anĂĄlise para a avaliar e quais os problemas relacionados com os diferentes critĂ©rios.
MĂ©todos: Foi elaborada uma pesquisa bibliogrĂĄfica, com recurso Ă s bases de dados eletrĂłnicas da PubMed / Medline e B-On. Foram selecionadas revisĂ”es sistemĂĄticas e artigos, estritamente relacionados com o tema, para que pudessem ser comparadas com rigor cientĂfico as razĂ”es das diferentes prevalĂȘncias da peri-implantite na literatura.
Resultados: ApĂłs anĂĄlise comparativa dos diferentes artigos, verificou-se que a prevalĂȘncia da peri-implantite se situa entre os valores de 8.9% a 47,1% a nĂvel mundial.
ConclusÔes: Pode concluir-se que a discrepùncia entre os valores registados pelos diferentes autores, se deve, essencialmente, ao facto de não se utilizarem igualdade de critérios na definição de peri-implantite e no limite de perda óssea marginal. No futuro serå importante que todos os investigadores usem o critério STROBE de forma uniforme.
Objective: The purpose of this bibliographic review was to evaluate the prevalence of peri-implantitis, which are the evaluation criteria to evaluate and which are the associated problems related to the different criteria. Methods: A bibliographic research was carried out using PubMed / Medline and B-On databases from which articles and systematic reviews were extracted so that the reasons for the different peri-implantitis prevalenceâs could be compared with scientific bases. Results: After a comparative analysis of the different articles, it was verified that the prevalence of peri-implantitis is between 8,9% and 47,1% worldwide. Conclusions: It can be concluded that this discrepancy between the values recorded by the different authors is essentially due to the fact that there are no clear definition criteria for peri-implantitis, as for the marginal bone loss. In the future it will be important for all researchers to use the uniform STROBE criterion.
Objective: The purpose of this bibliographic review was to evaluate the prevalence of peri-implantitis, which are the evaluation criteria to evaluate and which are the associated problems related to the different criteria. Methods: A bibliographic research was carried out using PubMed / Medline and B-On databases from which articles and systematic reviews were extracted so that the reasons for the different peri-implantitis prevalenceâs could be compared with scientific bases. Results: After a comparative analysis of the different articles, it was verified that the prevalence of peri-implantitis is between 8,9% and 47,1% worldwide. Conclusions: It can be concluded that this discrepancy between the values recorded by the different authors is essentially due to the fact that there are no clear definition criteria for peri-implantitis, as for the marginal bone loss. In the future it will be important for all researchers to use the uniform STROBE criterion.
Description
Keywords
Peri-implantitis Prevalence Peri-implant diseases