Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2014.40.2.61

Comparison of the reproducibility of results of a new peri-implantitis assessment system (implant success index) with the Misch classification  

Abrishami, Mohammad Reza (Department of Periodontics, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences)
Sabour, Siamak (Department of Community Oral Health (COH) Clinical Epidemiology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences)
Nasiri, Maryam (Private Practice)
Amid, Reza (Department of Periodontics, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences)
Kadkhodazadeh, Mahdi (Department of Periodontics, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons / v.40, no.2, 2014 , pp. 61-67 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objectives: The present study was conducted to determine the reproducibility of peri-implant tissue assessment using the new implant success index (ISI) in comparison with the Misch classification. Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study, 22 cases of peri-implant soft tissue with different conditions were selected, and color slides were prepared from them. The slides were shown to periodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, prosthodontists and general dentists, and these professionals were asked to score the images according to the Misch classification and ISI. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility scores of the viewers were assessed and reported using kappa and weighted kappa (WK) tests. Results: Inter-observer reproducibility of the ISI technique between the prosthodontists-periodontists (WK=0.85), prosthodontists-maxillofacial surgeons (WK=0.86) and periodontists-maxillofacial surgeons (WK=0.9) was better than that between general dentists and other specialists. In the two groups of general dentists and maxillofacial surgeons, ISI was more reproducible than the Misch classification system (WK=0.99 versus WK non-calculable, WK=1 and WK=0.86). The intra-observer reproducibility of both methods was equally excellent among periodontists (WK=1). For prosthodontists, the WK was not calculable via any of the methods. Conclusion: The intra-observer reproducibility of both the ISI and Misch classification techniques depends on the specialty and expertise of the clinician. Although ISI has more classes, it also has higher reproducibility than simpler classifications due to its ability to provide more detail.
Keywords
Peri-implantitis; Classification; Reproducibility; Bone loss;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Albrektsson T, Isidor F. Consensus report: implant therapy. In: Lang NP, Karring T, eds. Proceeding of the 1st European Workshop on Periodontology. Berlin: Quintessence; 1994:365-9.
2 Le Guéhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007;23:844-54.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Etienne D, Zabalegui I, Mattout P, Chiche F, et al. A prospective multicenter evaluation of 1,583 3i implants: 1- to 5-year data. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:820-8.
4 Astrand P, Engquist B, Dahlgren S, Gröndahl K, Engquist E, Feldmann H. Astra Tech and Brånemark system implants: a 5-year prospective study of marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:413-20.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Nelson K, Semper W, Hildebrand D, Ozyuvaci H. A retrospective analysis of sandblasted, acid-etched implants with reduced healing times with an observation period of up to 5 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:726-32.
6 Tonetti MS. Risk factors for osseodisintegration. Periodontol 2000 1998;17:55-62.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Marinello C, Ericsson I, Liljenberg B. Soft tissue reaction to de novo plaque formation on implants and teeth. An experimental study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:1-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Ericsson I, Berglundh T, Marinello C, Liljenberg B, Lindhe J. Long-standing plaque and gingivitis at implants and teeth in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:99-103.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(8 Suppl):286-91.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Leonhardt A, Dahlén G, Renvert S. Five-year clinical, microbiological, and radiological outcome following treatment of peri-implantitis in man. J Periodontol 2003;74:1415-22.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Behneke A, Behneke N, d'Hoedt B, Wagner W. Hard and soft tissue reactions to ITI screw implants: 3-year longitudinal results of a prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:749-57.
12 Roos-Jansåker AM, Lindahl C, Renvert H, Renvert S. Nine- to fourteen-year follow-up of implant treatment. Part II: presence of peri-implant lesions. J Clin Periodontol 2006;33:290-5.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Offenbacher S. Periodontal diseases: pathogenesis. Ann Periodontol 1996;1:821-78.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Albandar JM. Global risk factors and risk indicators for periodontal diseases. Periodontol 2000 2002;29:177-206.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Mombelli A, Lang NP. The diagnosis and treatment of peri-implantitis. Periodontol 2000 1998;17:63-76.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Brägger U, Aeschlimann S, Bürgin W, Hämmerle CH, Lang NP. Biological and technical complications and failures with fixed partial dentures (FPD) on implants and teeth after four to five years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:26-34.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Kadkhodazadeh M, Amid R. Evaluation of peri-implant tissue health using a scoring system. JIACD 2012;4:51-7.
18 Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008;17:5-15.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008:307-8.
20 Kadkhodazadeh M, Esfahrood ZR, Amid R, Zarnegarnia P. Comparison of the acceptability of a new scoring system with Misch's classification for dental implant success determination. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2012;22:85-93.   DOI
21 Murphy EA. The logic of medicine. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1997:119-36.
22 Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Wennström J, Lindhe J. The peri-implant hard and soft tissues at different implant systems. A comparative study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:212-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-72.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Jovanovic SA. The management of peri-implant breakdown around functioning osseointegrated dental implants. J Periodontol 1993;64(11 Suppl):1176-83.   DOI   ScienceOn