Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis.
Identifieur interne : 003C67 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 003C66; suivant : 003C68Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis.
Auteurs : A. Mombelli ; T. Mühle ; U. Br Gger ; N P Lang ; W B BürginSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 1997.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Implants, Dental Plaque Index, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation), Periodontal Attachment Loss (diagnosis), Periodontal Attachment Loss (pathology), Periodontal Index, Periodontal Pocket (diagnosis), Periodontal Pocket (pathology), Periodontics (instrumentation), Radiography, Dental, Reproducibility of Results, Stress, Mechanical.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- diagnosis : Periodontal Attachment Loss, Periodontal Pocket.
- instrumentation : Periodontics.
- pathology : Periodontal Attachment Loss, Periodontal Pocket.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Plaque Index, Humans, Periodontal Index, Radiography, Dental, Reproducibility of Results, Stress, Mechanical.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the tissue resistance to probing and the accuracy of depth determination at different force levels around implants and teeth. In 11 subjects 1 implant and 1 tooth at a comparable location and with comparable probing depth were investigated. The sites were located on either the mesial or distal aspect of the tooth and the implant. A probing device was used which allowed simultaneous monitoring of probing force and probe penetration and which standardized the insertion pathway for repeated measurements. The probing instrument was fitted with an attachment for an aiming device to take a radiograph with the probe tip in the sulcus, using a standardized projection geometry. Probing depth values were determined at 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 N probing force. The standard error of the individual measurement (Si), evaluated by comparison of repeated measurements in the same session, was 0.2 mm on implants and 0.1 mm on teeth. For implants there was a trend for slightly better reproducibility at higher force levels. Curve analysis of depth force patterns showed that a change in probing force had more impact on the depth reading in the peri-implant than in the periodontal situation. The mean distance between the probe tip and the peri-implant bone crest amounted to 0.75 +/- 0.60 mm at 0.25 N probing force. It is concluded that peri-implant probing depth measurements are more sensitive to force variation than periodontal pocket probing.
PubMed: 9555203
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:9555203Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis.</title>
<author><name sortKey="Mombelli, A" sort="Mombelli, A" uniqKey="Mombelli A" first="A" last="Mombelli">A. Mombelli</name>
<affiliation><nlm:affiliation>University of Bern, School of Dental Medicine, Switzerland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Muhle, T" sort="Muhle, T" uniqKey="Muhle T" first="T" last="Mühle">T. Mühle</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Br Gger, U" sort="Br Gger, U" uniqKey="Br Gger U" first="U" last="Br Gger">U. Br Gger</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Lang, N P" sort="Lang, N P" uniqKey="Lang N" first="N P" last="Lang">N P Lang</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Burgin, W B" sort="Burgin, W B" uniqKey="Burgin W" first="W B" last="Bürgin">W B Bürgin</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno>
<date when="1997">1997</date>
<idno type="RBID">pubmed:9555203</idno>
<idno type="pmid">9555203</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">003C67</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">003C67</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis.</title>
<author><name sortKey="Mombelli, A" sort="Mombelli, A" uniqKey="Mombelli A" first="A" last="Mombelli">A. Mombelli</name>
<affiliation><nlm:affiliation>University of Bern, School of Dental Medicine, Switzerland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Muhle, T" sort="Muhle, T" uniqKey="Muhle T" first="T" last="Mühle">T. Mühle</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Br Gger, U" sort="Br Gger, U" uniqKey="Br Gger U" first="U" last="Br Gger">U. Br Gger</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Lang, N P" sort="Lang, N P" uniqKey="Lang N" first="N P" last="Lang">N P Lang</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Burgin, W B" sort="Burgin, W B" uniqKey="Burgin W" first="W B" last="Bürgin">W B Bürgin</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j">Clinical oral implants research</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno>
<imprint><date when="1997" type="published">1997</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term>
<term>Dental Implants</term>
<term>Dental Plaque Index</term>
<term>Humans</term>
<term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation)</term>
<term>Periodontal Attachment Loss (diagnosis)</term>
<term>Periodontal Attachment Loss (pathology)</term>
<term>Periodontal Index</term>
<term>Periodontal Pocket (diagnosis)</term>
<term>Periodontal Pocket (pathology)</term>
<term>Periodontics (instrumentation)</term>
<term>Radiography, Dental</term>
<term>Reproducibility of Results</term>
<term>Stress, Mechanical</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="diagnosis" xml:lang="en"><term>Periodontal Attachment Loss</term>
<term>Periodontal Pocket</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="instrumentation" xml:lang="en"><term>Periodontics</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="pathology" xml:lang="en"><term>Periodontal Attachment Loss</term>
<term>Periodontal Pocket</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term>
<term>Dental Plaque Index</term>
<term>Humans</term>
<term>Periodontal Index</term>
<term>Radiography, Dental</term>
<term>Reproducibility of Results</term>
<term>Stress, Mechanical</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The purpose of this study was to compare the tissue resistance to probing and the accuracy of depth determination at different force levels around implants and teeth. In 11 subjects 1 implant and 1 tooth at a comparable location and with comparable probing depth were investigated. The sites were located on either the mesial or distal aspect of the tooth and the implant. A probing device was used which allowed simultaneous monitoring of probing force and probe penetration and which standardized the insertion pathway for repeated measurements. The probing instrument was fitted with an attachment for an aiming device to take a radiograph with the probe tip in the sulcus, using a standardized projection geometry. Probing depth values were determined at 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 N probing force. The standard error of the individual measurement (Si), evaluated by comparison of repeated measurements in the same session, was 0.2 mm on implants and 0.1 mm on teeth. For implants there was a trend for slightly better reproducibility at higher force levels. Curve analysis of depth force patterns showed that a change in probing force had more impact on the depth reading in the peri-implant than in the periodontal situation. The mean distance between the probe tip and the peri-implant bone crest amounted to 0.75 +/- 0.60 mm at 0.25 N probing force. It is concluded that peri-implant probing depth measurements are more sensitive to force variation than periodontal pocket probing.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">9555203</PMID>
<DateCompleted><Year>1998</Year>
<Month>06</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
</DateCompleted>
<DateRevised><Year>2006</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>15</Day>
</DateRevised>
<Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0905-7161</ISSN>
<JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>8</Volume>
<Issue>6</Issue>
<PubDate><Year>1997</Year>
<Month>Dec</Month>
</PubDate>
</JournalIssue>
<Title>Clinical oral implants research</Title>
<ISOAbbreviation>Clin Oral Implants Res</ISOAbbreviation>
</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis.</ArticleTitle>
<Pagination><MedlinePgn>448-54</MedlinePgn>
</Pagination>
<Abstract><AbstractText>The purpose of this study was to compare the tissue resistance to probing and the accuracy of depth determination at different force levels around implants and teeth. In 11 subjects 1 implant and 1 tooth at a comparable location and with comparable probing depth were investigated. The sites were located on either the mesial or distal aspect of the tooth and the implant. A probing device was used which allowed simultaneous monitoring of probing force and probe penetration and which standardized the insertion pathway for repeated measurements. The probing instrument was fitted with an attachment for an aiming device to take a radiograph with the probe tip in the sulcus, using a standardized projection geometry. Probing depth values were determined at 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 N probing force. The standard error of the individual measurement (Si), evaluated by comparison of repeated measurements in the same session, was 0.2 mm on implants and 0.1 mm on teeth. For implants there was a trend for slightly better reproducibility at higher force levels. Curve analysis of depth force patterns showed that a change in probing force had more impact on the depth reading in the peri-implant than in the periodontal situation. The mean distance between the probe tip and the peri-implant bone crest amounted to 0.75 +/- 0.60 mm at 0.25 N probing force. It is concluded that peri-implant probing depth measurements are more sensitive to force variation than periodontal pocket probing.</AbstractText>
</Abstract>
<AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Mombelli</LastName>
<ForeName>A</ForeName>
<Initials>A</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>University of Bern, School of Dental Medicine, Switzerland.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Mühle</LastName>
<ForeName>T</ForeName>
<Initials>T</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Brägger</LastName>
<ForeName>U</ForeName>
<Initials>U</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Lang</LastName>
<ForeName>N P</ForeName>
<Initials>NP</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Bürgin</LastName>
<ForeName>W B</ForeName>
<Initials>WB</Initials>
</Author>
</AuthorList>
<Language>eng</Language>
<PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D013485">Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't</PublicationType>
</PublicationTypeList>
</Article>
<MedlineJournalInfo><Country>Denmark</Country>
<MedlineTA>Clin Oral Implants Res</MedlineTA>
<NlmUniqueID>9105713</NlmUniqueID>
<ISSNLinking>0905-7161</ISSNLinking>
</MedlineJournalInfo>
<ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber>
<NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance>
</Chemical>
</ChemicalList>
<CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset>
<MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003758" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implantation, Endosseous</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Implants</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003774" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Plaque Index</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007576" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="N">rehabilitation</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017622" MajorTopicYN="N">Periodontal Attachment Loss</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000175" MajorTopicYN="N">diagnosis</QualifierName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000473" MajorTopicYN="N">pathology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D010512" MajorTopicYN="N">Periodontal Index</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D010514" MajorTopicYN="N">Periodontal Pocket</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000175" MajorTopicYN="Y">diagnosis</QualifierName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000473" MajorTopicYN="N">pathology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D010517" MajorTopicYN="N">Periodontics</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="Y">instrumentation</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011861" MajorTopicYN="N">Radiography, Dental</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015203" MajorTopicYN="N">Reproducibility of Results</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013314" MajorTopicYN="N">Stress, Mechanical</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
</MeshHeadingList>
</MedlineCitation>
<PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>1998</Year>
<Month>4</Month>
<Day>29</Day>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>1998</Year>
<Month>4</Month>
<Day>29</Day>
<Hour>0</Hour>
<Minute>1</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>1998</Year>
<Month>4</Month>
<Day>29</Day>
<Hour>0</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
</History>
<PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">9555203</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</PubmedData>
</pubmed>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PubMed/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003C67 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 003C67 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= PubMed |étape= Corpus |type= RBID |clé= pubmed:9555203 |texte= Comparison of periodontal and peri-implant probing by depth-force pattern analysis. }}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:9555203" \ | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \ | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |