Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34564684›Full record

ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2022

Impact of cone-beam computed tomography for the identification and management of an oral portal of entry in patients with infective endocarditis. A Delphi study.

A Cloitre, E Hascoët, B Iung, X Duval, P Lesclous

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

A CloitreFaculty of Dentistry,1 place Alexis Ricordeau 44042 Nantes, France alexandra.cloitre@univ-nantes.fr.
E Hascoët
B Iung
X Duval
P Lesclous

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfective endocarditis (IE) is a rare and life-threatening disease. Cutaneous portal of entry (POE) is predominant for IE, but an oral POE is the second most frequent source. Thus looking for and treating an oral POE in IE patients is of critical importance in order to reduce the risk of IE relapse or recurrence. The objectives of this study were: 1) To reach a consensus on decision-making following the detection of an oral POE on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) while they were not identified using the current recommended approach in IE patients (oral examination and orthopantomogram: OPT). 2) To determine whether this consensus differs when regarding the microbiology of IE. MATERIAL AND

methodsTwenty oral or maxillofacial surgeons participated to this Delphi study. The questionnaire was based on five radiological cases (OPT and matching CBCT) with two scenarios according to the objectives of detecting oral POE in an IE patient (curative in case of oral causative microorganism, and preventive if not) and different therapeutic approaches (surgical or conservative treatment, no treatment) for each of them. Consensus was defined as an agreement rate of ≥75%.

resultsThe response rate was≥85%. After four rounds, consensus was achieved for all proposals. CBCT changed the decision-making of experts in four cases. In one case, the decision was influenced by the IE microbiology toward a more radical approach in case of oral causative microorganism.

conclusionsIn IE patients, CBCT changed markedly the decision-making of experts by eradicating more oral POE than when using OPT. This could reduce the risk of IE relapse and recurrence.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyEndocarditisDelphi TechniqueDental CareHumansRadiography, Panoramic

Identifiers

PMID34564684
PMCPMC8719786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.