Efficacy of periodontal treatment modalities in Down syndrome patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective The systematic review aimed to review the existing evidence, to identify and appraise the effectiveness of periodontal prevention and treatment modalities in individuals diagnosed with Down syndrome (DS) and to determine the estimates of the effects of implemented periodontal prevention an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Evidence-based dentistry 2024-12, Vol.25 (4), p.213-214
Hauptverfasser: Yehia, Zakaria, Silbereisen, Angelika, Koletsi, Despina, Arabzadehtousi, Mahla, Tsilingaridis, Georgios, Bostanci, Nagihan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective The systematic review aimed to review the existing evidence, to identify and appraise the effectiveness of periodontal prevention and treatment modalities in individuals diagnosed with Down syndrome (DS) and to determine the estimates of the effects of implemented periodontal prevention and treatment strategies compared to chromosomally normal (CN) individuals. Methodology The systematic review was conducted and reported in conformity with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. The study protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework. Electronic and manual searches, in accordance with PICO framework and delineated inclusion/exclusion criteria, were conducted in multiple databases. Results The initial search identified 11,704 studies. After removing duplicates, 9,048 remained. Title and abstract screening narrowed these to 281 for full-text review. Ultimately, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 4 eligible for quantitative data synthesis. Results of the meta-analysis indicated that professional tooth cleaning in combination with oral hygiene reinforcement was less effective in the reduction of PPD in patients with DS compared to those without DS (Mean difference (MD): 0.23; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.14 to 0.32; p  
ISSN:1462-0049
1476-5446
1476-5446
DOI:10.1038/s41432-024-01055-x