Mean annual attachment, bone level, and tooth loss: A systematic review

Many definitions of periodontitis have been used in the literature for population-based studies, but there is no accepted standard. In early epidemiologic studies, the two major periodontal diseases, gingivitis and periodontitis, were combined and considered to be a continuum. National United States surveys were conducted in 1960 to 1962, 1971 to 1974, 1981, 1985 to 1986, 1988 to 1994, and 1999 to 2000. The case definitions and protocols used in the six national surveys reflect a continuing evolution and improvement over time. Generally, the clinical diagnosis of periodontitis is based on measures of probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), the radiographic pattern and extent of alveolar bone loss, gingival inflammation measured as bleeding on probing, or a combination of these measures. Several other patient characteristics are considered, and several factors, such as age, can affect measurements of PD and CAL. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements of PD and CAL are important because case definitions for periodontitis are based largely on either or both measurements, and relatively small changes in these values can result in large changes in disease prevalence. The classification currently accepted by the American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) was devised by the 1999 International Workshop for a Classification of Periodontal Diseases and Conditions. However, in 2003 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the AAP appointed a working group to develop further standardized clinical case definitions for population-based studies of periodontitis. This classification defines severe periodontitis and moderate periodontitis in terms of PD and CAL to enhance case definitions and further demonstrates the importance of thresholds of PD and CAL and the number of affected sites when determining prevalence. Show more

1. The interpretation of epidemiological data of periodontal disease is difficult, due to inconsistencies in the methodology used. It is not possible, therefore, to accurately assess if the prevalence of the periodontal diseases shows a world-wide decline. As long as the disease is assessed through accumulated clinical attachment loss, retention of the natural dentition in older ages entails increased prevalence in these cohorts. Contemporary epidemiological studies should ideally employ full-mouth examination of the periodontal tissues. Partial recording estimates are generally biased, especially when the prevalence of the disease is low. 2. Early-onset periodontitis is infrequent in all populations. Adult periodontitis is rather prevalent; however, advanced disease affects limited subfractions of the population (probably less than 10 to 15%). Although prevalence figures vary with race and geographic region, in most cases, the progression pattern of the disease seems compatible with the retention of a functional dentition throughout life. 3. Of a plethora of behavioral and environmental risk markers identified by multi-variate analysis, smoking and presence of certain subgingival microorganisms have been proven to be true risk factors. The same holds true for diabetes mellitus, a systemic condition that confers a risk for periodontal disease which is independent of the effect of other significant factors. 4. In certain cases, periodontal infections appear to have a systemic impact on the host. Most recent data indicate that periodontal disease may confer risk for coronary heart disease and pre-term low birth weight. Show more

This paper describes the initiation, rate of progress of periodontal disease and consequent tooth loss in a population never exposed to any programs or incidents relative to prevention and treatment of dental diseases. The group consisted of 480 male laborers at two tea plantations in Sri Lanka. The study design and baseline data have been published. At the initial examination in 1970, the age of the participants ranged between 14 and 31 years. Subsequent examinations occurred in 1971, 1973, 1977, 1982 and 1985. Thus, the study covers the age range 14-46 years. Throughout the study, the clinical indices were scored by the same two examiners, both well-trained and experienced periodontitis. Intra-examiner reproducibility for each index was tested at baseline and repeated periodically during the study. The data for each examination were computerized and updated on an ongoing basis. At the last examination in 1985, there were 161 individuals who had participated in the first survey. This population did not perform any conventional oral hygiene measures and consequently displayed quite uniformly large aggregates of plaque, calculus and stain on their teeth. Virtually all gingival units exhibited inflammation. Based on interproximal loss of attachment and tooth mortality rates, three subpopulations were identified: (1) individuals (approximately 8%) with rapid progression of periodontal disease (RP), those (approximately 81%) with moderate progression (MP), and a group (approximately 11%) who exhibited no progression (NP) of periodontal disease beyond gingivitis. At 35 years of age, the mean loss of attachment in the RP group was approximately 9 mm, the MP group had approximately 4 mm and the NP group had less than 1 mm loss of attachment. At the age of 45 years, the mean loss of attachment in the RP group was approximately 13 mm and the MP group approximately 7 mm. The annual rate of destruction in the RP group varied between 0.1 and 1.0 mm, in the MP group between 0.05 and 0.5 mm, and in the NP group between 0.05 and 0.09 mm. Since this population was virtually caries free, essentially all missing teeth were lost due to periodontal disease. In the RP group, tooth loss already occurred at 20 years of age and increased throughout the next 25 years. At 35 years of age, 12 teeth had been lost, at 40 years of age 20 teeth were missing and at 45 all teeth were lost. In the MP groups, tooth mortality started after 30 years of age and increased throughout the decade.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) Show more