European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2023
Dental caries and dental developmental defects as adverse effects of antineoplastic treatment in childhood cancer survivors.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Seremidi K, Kavvadia K, Kattamis A, Polychronopoulou A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence of dental caries and dental developmental defects (DDD) in childhood cancer survivors (CCS) and identify disease and treatment-related risk factors.
METHODS: CCS aged up to 21 years, diagnosed with a malignancy before the age of 10 years and in remission for at least one year were included. Data were collected from patients' medical records and through a clinical examination where presence of dental caries and prevalence of DDD were recorded. Fisher's exact test was used to assess possible correlations and multivariate regression analysis to determine risk factors for defect development.
RESULTS: Seventy CCS with a mean chronological age of 11.2 years at the time of examination, mean age at cancer diagnosis of 4.17 years, and a mean post-treatment follow-up time of 5.48 years were included. Mean DMFT/dmft was 1.31, with 29% of survivors presenting with at least one carious lesion. Younger patients on the day of examination and patients treated with higher radiation dose, showed significantly higher prevalence of dental caries. The prevalence of DDD was 59%, with demarcated opacities being the defect most commonly observed (40%). Age at dental examination, diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and time that have elapsed since the end of treatment were the factors significantly affecting its prevalence. Regression analysis revealed that age at examination was the only factor significantly associated with the presence of coronal defects.
CONCLUSION: A great number of CCS presented with at least one carious lesion or a DDD, with the prevalence being significantly associated with various disease-specific characteristics, but age at dental examination the only significant predictor.
METHODS: CCS aged up to 21 years, diagnosed with a malignancy before the age of 10 years and in remission for at least one year were included. Data were collected from patients' medical records and through a clinical examination where presence of dental caries and prevalence of DDD were recorded. Fisher's exact test was used to assess possible correlations and multivariate regression analysis to determine risk factors for defect development.
RESULTS: Seventy CCS with a mean chronological age of 11.2 years at the time of examination, mean age at cancer diagnosis of 4.17 years, and a mean post-treatment follow-up time of 5.48 years were included. Mean DMFT/dmft was 1.31, with 29% of survivors presenting with at least one carious lesion. Younger patients on the day of examination and patients treated with higher radiation dose, showed significantly higher prevalence of dental caries. The prevalence of DDD was 59%, with demarcated opacities being the defect most commonly observed (40%). Age at dental examination, diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and time that have elapsed since the end of treatment were the factors significantly affecting its prevalence. Regression analysis revealed that age at examination was the only factor significantly associated with the presence of coronal defects.
CONCLUSION: A great number of CCS presented with at least one carious lesion or a DDD, with the prevalence being significantly associated with various disease-specific characteristics, but age at dental examination the only significant predictor.