Eduardo Montero,Nerea Sánchez,Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez,Mercedes López-Durán,Ana Carrillo de Albornoz,Thomas Dietrich
{"title":"Emerging Technologies and Algorithms for Periodontal Screening and Risk of Disease Progression in Non-Dental Settings: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Eduardo Montero,Nerea Sánchez,Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez,Mercedes López-Durán,Ana Carrillo de Albornoz,Thomas Dietrich","doi":"10.1111/jcpe.14168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AIM\r\nTo evaluate different tools to screen for periodontal diseases and/or evaluate the risk for disease progression in non-dental clinical settings.\r\n\r\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\r\nThe PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline was followed. A systematic search was conducted on three databases. In order to provide a comprehensive picture of periodontal diseases (Population) screening and risk assessment tools (Concept) in non-dental settings (Context), the available information was identified and presented in terms of the sources of data/domains assessed and, eventually, how the tools/algorithms were validated. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nA total of 5313 articles were identified for abstract screening. Finally, 102 were included for data synthesis. The included studies were classified into domains/clusters. Only two studies focused on risk assessment for disease progression. Algorithms designed to screen for gingivitis tended to present low sensitivity values, while the screening performance improved for periodontitis, particularly for severe periodontitis. Validated self-reported questionnaires plus socio-demographic determinants (e.g., age), certain biomarkers in saliva (e.g., activated matrix metalloproteinase-8, aMMP-8) and artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms based on orthopantomographs (OPGs) present the best screening capacity for periodontitis.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nScreening for periodontitis in non-dental settings is feasible. Validated self-reported questionnaires remain the gold standard for screening severe periodontitis in non-dental settings, although AI algorithms based on biomarkers in saliva, or derived from OPGs, have shown promising results.","PeriodicalId":15380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","volume":"639 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.14168","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
AIM
To evaluate different tools to screen for periodontal diseases and/or evaluate the risk for disease progression in non-dental clinical settings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline was followed. A systematic search was conducted on three databases. In order to provide a comprehensive picture of periodontal diseases (Population) screening and risk assessment tools (Concept) in non-dental settings (Context), the available information was identified and presented in terms of the sources of data/domains assessed and, eventually, how the tools/algorithms were validated. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS
A total of 5313 articles were identified for abstract screening. Finally, 102 were included for data synthesis. The included studies were classified into domains/clusters. Only two studies focused on risk assessment for disease progression. Algorithms designed to screen for gingivitis tended to present low sensitivity values, while the screening performance improved for periodontitis, particularly for severe periodontitis. Validated self-reported questionnaires plus socio-demographic determinants (e.g., age), certain biomarkers in saliva (e.g., activated matrix metalloproteinase-8, aMMP-8) and artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms based on orthopantomographs (OPGs) present the best screening capacity for periodontitis.
CONCLUSIONS
Screening for periodontitis in non-dental settings is feasible. Validated self-reported questionnaires remain the gold standard for screening severe periodontitis in non-dental settings, although AI algorithms based on biomarkers in saliva, or derived from OPGs, have shown promising results.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Clinical Periodontology was founded by the British, Dutch, French, German, Scandinavian, and Swiss Societies of Periodontology.
The aim of the Journal of Clinical Periodontology is to provide the platform for exchange of scientific and clinical progress in the field of Periodontology and allied disciplines, and to do so at the highest possible level. The Journal also aims to facilitate the application of new scientific knowledge to the daily practice of the concerned disciplines and addresses both practicing clinicians and academics. The Journal is the official publication of the European Federation of Periodontology but wishes to retain its international scope.
The Journal publishes original contributions of high scientific merit in the fields of periodontology and implant dentistry. Its scope encompasses the physiology and pathology of the periodontium, the tissue integration of dental implants, the biology and the modulation of periodontal and alveolar bone healing and regeneration, diagnosis, epidemiology, prevention and therapy of periodontal disease, the clinical aspects of tooth replacement with dental implants, and the comprehensive rehabilitation of the periodontal patient. Review articles by experts on new developments in basic and applied periodontal science and associated dental disciplines, advances in periodontal or implant techniques and procedures, and case reports which illustrate important new information are also welcome.