Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34779939›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of implant dentistry2021

Efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical and surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ausra Ramanauskaite, Tobias Fretwurst, Frank Schwarz

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of implant dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

16 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

3 authors.

Ausra RamanauskaiteDepartment of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt, Carolinum, 60596, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Tobias FretwurstDepartment of Oral- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Frankfurt, Germany.
Frank SchwarzDepartment of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Goethe University, Carolinum, Frankfurt, Germany. f.schwarz@med.uni-frankfurt.de.ORCID 0000-0002-5873-9903

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical or surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND

methodsProspective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies comparing alternative or adjunctive measures, and reporting on changes in bleeding scores (i.e., bleed0ing index (BI) or bleeding on probing (BOP)), probing depth (PD) values or suppuration (SUPP) were searched.

resultsPeri-implant mucositis: adjunctive use of local antiseptics lead to greater PD reduction (weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 0.23 mm; p = 0.03, respectively), whereas changes in BOP were comparable (WMD = - 5.30%; p = 0.29). Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: alternative measures for biofilm removal and systemic antibiotics yielded higher BOP reduction (WMD = - 28.09%; p = 0.01 and WMD = - 17.35%; p = 0.01, respectively). Surgical non-reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment: WMD in PD amounted to - 1.11 mm favoring adjunctive implantoplasty (p = 0.02). Adjunctive reconstructive measures lead to significantly higher radiographic bone defect fill/reduction (WMD = 56.46%; p = 0.01 and WMD = - 1.47 mm; p = 0.01), PD (- 0.51 mm; p = 0.01) and lower soft-tissue recession (WMD = - 0.63 mm; p = 0.01), while changes in BOP were not significant (WMD = - 11.11%; p = 0.11).

conclusionsAlternative and adjunctive measures provided no beneficial effect in resolving peri-implant mucositis, while alternative measures were superior in reducing BOP values following non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Adjunctive reconstructive measures were beneficial regarding radiographic bone-defect fill/reduction, PD reduction and lower soft-tissue recession, although they did not improve the resolution of mucosal inflammation.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalDental ImplantsMucositisPeri-ImplantitisHumansProspective StudiesAnti-Infective Agents, LocalDental ImplantsDental implantPeri-implant diseaseSystematic reviewTreatment

Identifiers

PMID34779939
PMCPMC8593130

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.