Tooth loss in complying and non-complying periodontitis patients with different periodontal risk levels during supportive periodontal care

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate yearly tooth loss rate (TLR) in periodontitis patients with different periodontal risk levels who had complied or not complied with supportive periodontal care (SPC). Materials and methods Data from 168 periodontitis patients enrolled in a SPC program based on a 3-month suggested recall interval for at least 3.5 years were analyzed. For patients with a mean recall interval within 2–4 months (“compliers”) or > 4 months (“non-compliers”) with different PerioRisk levels (Trombelli et al. 2009), TLR (irrespective of the cause for tooth loss) was calculated. TLR values were considered in relation to meaningful TLR benchmarks from the literature for periodontitis patients either under SPC (0.15 teeth/year; positive benchmark) or irregularly complying with SPC (0.36 teeth/year; negative benchmark). Results In both compliers and non-compliers, TLR was significantly below or similar to the positive benchmark in PerioRisk level 3 (0.08 and 0.03 teeth/year, respectively) and PerioRisk level 4 (0.12 and 0.18 teeth/year, respectively). Although marked and clinically relevant in non-compliers, the difference between TLR of compliers (0.32 teeth/year) and non-compliers (0.52 teeth/year) with PerioRisk level 5 and the negative benchmark was not significant. Conclusion A SPC protocol based on a 3- to 6-month recall interval may effectively limit long-term tooth loss in periodontitis patients with PerioRisk levels 3 and 4. A fully complied 3-month SPC protocol seems ineffective when applied to PerioRisk level 5 patients. Clinical relevance PerioRisk seems to represent a valid tool to inform the SPC recall interval as well as the intensity of active treatment prior to SPC enrollment.

The loss of molars in supportive periodontal care: A 10‐year follow‐up for tooth‐ and patient‐related factors

“…The final goal of periodontal therapy is the retention of teeth during the lifecourse (Eickholz et al, 2008). Different longitudinal studies in periodontal patients have demonstrated that TL can be prevented or significantly reduced in the presence of proper APT (Axelsson et al, 2004;Eickholz et al, 2008;Dannewitz et al, 2016, Farina et al, 2021 and followed by a good SPC programme (Costa et al, 2012;Armitage & Xenoudi, 2016;Costa et al, 2019).…”

“…Tooth loss (TL), the most tangible result from periodontitis progression, has physiological and psychological impacts on a patient's life (Costa et al, 2014;Dannewitz et al, 2016;Costa et al, 2019). The effectiveness of periodontal therapy in reducing TL and the importance of patient compliance during supportive periodontal care (SPC) have been previously demonstrated (Axelsson et al, 2004;Faggion Jr et al, 2007;Costa et al, 2012;Costa et al, 2014;Graetz et al, 2015;Armitage & Xenoudi, 2016;Farina et al, 2021).…”

Role of supportive periodontal management in patient with metastatic cancer

“…23 Tooth loss rate for patient with high periodontitis risk is significantly higher than low-risk patients. 24 In this case, the patient is under the high-risk category due to ACC and smoking habits. 23,25 It is important to start tobacco cessation programmes for the patient to achieve a better outcome of the periodontal disease and reduce the risk of tooth loss during the maintenance period.…”

Peri-implant tissue conditions following transcrestal and lateral sinus floor elevation: 3-year results of a bi-center, randomized trial

“…At 1-year visit, patients received personalized indications regarding their supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) program based on their periodontal risk level [33][34][35], and were left free to perform SPT at the center where they underwent surgery or other dental settings. At 3 years, patients were recalled for a follow-up visit where clinical and radiographic assessments were performed to evaluate the conditions of peri-implant tissues.…”