2019
DOI: 10.1093/ibd/izz128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High Prevalence of Apical Periodontitis in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Age- and Gender- matched Case-control Study

Abstract: Results of this age- and gender- matched case-control study show that the prevalence of apical periodontitis, diagnosed as radiolucent periapical lesions, is higher in patients with inflammatory bowel disease than in healthy control subjects (OR = 5.71; p = 0.0048).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
34
1
4

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(63 reference statements)
4
34
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The recruitment method of the patients was similar to that used in previous studies [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Apical periodontitis was diagnosed using the ‘periapical index’ (PAI) scoring system [ 7 ], widely used in epidemiological and clinical studies in which the presence of radiolucent periapical lesions is assessed to determine the prevalence of AP [ 3 , 37 , 38 ]. Although there may be an underestimation of lesions when panoramic radiography was used [ 39 ], the difference with periapical radiography is not statistically significant [ 40 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The recruitment method of the patients was similar to that used in previous studies [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Apical periodontitis was diagnosed using the ‘periapical index’ (PAI) scoring system [ 7 ], widely used in epidemiological and clinical studies in which the presence of radiolucent periapical lesions is assessed to determine the prevalence of AP [ 3 , 37 , 38 ]. Although there may be an underestimation of lesions when panoramic radiography was used [ 39 ], the difference with periapical radiography is not statistically significant [ 40 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The possibility of comparisons between studies carried out with calibrated observers makes this system attractive [ 44 ] to better standardize the evaluations and allow comparison with the results of other researchers. Additionally, although the PAI score system was first described for periapical radiographs [ 26 ], it has been used in many epidemiological studies for panoramic radiographs [ 22 , 24 , 27 , 37 , 38 , 45 , 46 ]. The possibility of comparisons among the studies carried out with calibrated observers makes this system attractive [ 41 ], in order to better standardize the evaluations and allow the comparison with the result of other investigators.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seven studies were mistakenly classified by their authors as retrospective studies, when in fact they were cross-sectional (Bołtacz-Rzepkowska & Laszkiewicz 2005, Gumru et al 2011, Ureyen Kaya et al 2013, Willershausen et al 2014, Hussein et al 2016, Jalali et al 2017, Piras et al 2017. Four studies were classified as case-control, but based on their design, they were also cross-sectional studies (Hommez et al 2008, Pasqualini et al 2012, Leal et al 2015, Poyato-Borrego et al 2019. Only one study was a real case-control (Khalighinejad et al 2017a).…”
Section: Study Selection and Study Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The risk for periodontitis among patients with IBD has been reported in recent studies[ 15 , 26 - 28 ]. In a matched-cohort study demonstrating the prevalence and relative risk of periodontitis, patients with CD were at a 1.36-fold increased risk for periodontitis than controls[ 29 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%