Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31817894›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Peri-Implantitis Diagnosis and Prognosis Using Biomarkers in Peri-Implant Crevicular Fluid: A Narrative Review.

Hatem Alassy, Praveen Parachuru, Larry Wolff

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06408467 (Monitoring of Non-Surgical Treatment of Peri-implantitis, Traditional Measurement Methods and aMMP-8 Test Technology-Cross Sectional Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT06408467 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Monitoring of Non-Surgical Treatment of Peri-implantitis, Traditional Measurement Methods and aMMP-8 Test Technology-Cross Sectional Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorLahanna oyRan2022 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsPeri-implant Mucositis, Peri-ImplantitisArmsaMMP-8 diagnostic test
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hatem AlassyDivision of Periodontology, Department of Developmental and Surgical Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Praveen ParachuruDivision of Periodontology, Department of Developmental and Surgical Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Larry WolffDivision of Periodontology, Department of Developmental and Surgical Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dental implant diseases, peri-implantitis (PI) and peri-implant mucositis (PIM), have shown wide prevalence in recent studies. Despite the prevalence, diagnosing peri-implant disease (PID) remains challenging as common diagnostic methods of periodontal probing and radiographs may be inaccurate. These methods only document pre-existing destruction rather than current disease activity. Furthermore, there is no current model to predict the progression of PID. Though a predictive model is lacking, biomarkers may offer some potential. Biomarkers are commonly used in medicine to objectively determine disease state, or responses to a therapeutic intervention. Gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) biomarkers have moderate diagnostic validity in periodontitis. Biomarkers in peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) also show promising results in regard to their diagnostic and prognostic value. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge of PICF biomarkers in the diagnosis of PID and evaluate their validity to predict disease progression. This review found that PICF studies utilize different methods of sampling and interpretation with varying validity (sensitivity and specificity). A number of promising diagnostic techniques were identified. Commercially available chair-side tests for MMP-8 to diagnose periodontal disease and PID activity are now available. Future directions include proteomics and metabolomics for accurate, site-specific diagnosis and prediction of PID progression. Although more research is needed, this review concludes that the assessment of proinflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, TNFα, MMP-8) in the PICF may be of value to diagnose PI and PIM but current research remains insufficient to indicate whether biomarkers predict peri-implant disease progression.

Indexed as

biomarkersimplant diseasemucositisperi-implant crevicular fluidperi-implantitisperi-implant sulcular fluid

Identifiers

PMID31817894
PMCPMC6963443
OpenAlexW2991951254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.