Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32369987›Full record

ReviewMicroorganisms2020

The Microbiome of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Philipp Sahrmann, Fabienne Gilli, Daniel B Wiedemeier, Thomas Attin, Patrick R Schmidlin, Lamprini Karygianni

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microorganisms, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
22.1field-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.

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

85 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 168 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Systemic Antibiotic Therapy in the Treatment of Peri-Implantitis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. The Japanese dental science review · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philipp SahrmannClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-5568-2529
Fabienne GilliClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.
Daniel B WiedemeierStatistical Services, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas AttinClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.
Patrick R SchmidlinClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1377-0325
Lamprini KarygianniClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7893-0393
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aimed to systematically compare microbial profiles of peri-implantitis to those of periodontitis and healthy implants. Therefore, an electronic search in five databases was conducted. For inclusion, studies assessing the microbiome of peri-implantitis in otherwise healthy patients were considered. Literature was assessed for consistent evidence of exclusive or predominant peri-implantitis microbiota. Of 158 potentially eligible articles, data of 64 studies on 3730 samples from peri-implant sites were included in this study. Different assessment methods were described in the studies, namely bacterial culture, PCR-based assessment, hybridization techniques, pyrosequencing, and transcriptomic analyses. After analysis of 13 selected culture-dependent studies, no microbial species were found to be specific for peri-implantitis. After assessment of 28 studies using PCR-based methods and a meta-analysis on 19 studies, a higher prevalence of

Indexed as

culture-dependent techniqueshybridizationoral pathogensPCRpyrosequencing

Identifiers

PMID32369987
PMCPMC7284896
OpenAlexW3021385621

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.