Aggressive Periodontitis: 5‐Year Follow‐Up of Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hypothesis that in subjects with aggressive periodontitis, a long-term stability of periodontal health can be achieved following comprehensive mechanical/surgical and systemic antimicrobial therapy was tested in this prospective study. METHODS: Thirteen patients (36.9+/-7.4 years) with aggressive periodontitis were monitored before and up to 5 years following periodontal therapy. Clinical attachment levels (CAL) were assessed pretherapy, and at 3 months following completion of active periodontal therapy supplemented by amoxicillin plus metronidazole. All subjects were subsequently enrolled in a maintenance program and provided with supportive periodontal therapy with 3 to 4 appointments annually. Reexaminations were performed after 6 months and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. The data were analyzed using the method of generalized estimating equations (GEE) for CAL changes from baseline to the 3-month visit, and from completion of periodontal therapy to each annual visit up to the 5-year follow-up reappointment. RESULTS: During the 5-year study, all subjects strongly benefited from periodontal treatment. Between baseline and the 3-month reexamination, the CAL levels revealed a significant decrease of 2.23 mm (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.77 to 2.69 mm; P < or =0.001). At the 5-year maintenance visit, the CAL changes ranged from -0.04 to +0.29 mm with no further statistically significant periodontal breakdown (P >0.05). Five years after surgery, 3.2% of the treated sites demonstrated a further CAL gain > or =3 mm. A stabilization (CAL -2 to +2 mm) occurred in 94.6% of the cases. The number of periodontal sites experiencing a breakdown varied from 5.3% at 6 months to 2.2% at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: In aggressive periodontitis, comprehensive mechanical/surgical and antimicrobial therapy is an appropriate treatment regimen for long-term stabilization of periodontal health. In this study, periodontal disease progression was successfully arrested in 95% of the initially compromised lesions, while 2% to 5% experienced discrete or recurrent episodes of loss of periodontal support.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".