Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34961495›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2021

The efficacy of systemic antibiotics as an adjunct to surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review.

Malene Øen, Knut N Leknes, Bodil Lund, Dagmar F Bunæs

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. 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
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Antibiotic Resistance in Patients with Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Malene ØenDepartment of Clinical Dentistry - Periodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Aarstadveien 19, 5009, Bergen, Norway.
Knut N LeknesDepartment of Clinical Dentistry - Periodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Aarstadveien 19, 5009, Bergen, Norway. knut.leknes@uib.no.
Bodil LundDivision of Oral Diagnostics and Oral Rehabilitation, Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet and Medical Unit for Reconstructive Plastic- and Craniofacial Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Dagmar F BunæsDepartment of Clinical Dentistry - Periodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Aarstadveien 19, 5009, Bergen, Norway.
University of Bergen · NOKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrobial biofilm accumulation is the main cause of peri-implantitis. The majority of surgical peri-implantitis treatment protocols suggests adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics to target specific putative bacteria. The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the adjunctive use of systemically administered antibiotics in surgical treatment of peri-implantitis by reviewing previously published systematic reviews and primary studies.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in four electronic databases (MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science) for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and systematic reviews reporting surgical treatment of peri-implantitis with and without adjunctive systemically administered antibiotic therapy. The included systematic reviews and primary studies were qualitatively assessed using AMSTAR and GRADE, respectively. No restrictions were set for date of publication, journal, or language.

resultsThe literature search identified 681 papers. Only seven systematic reviews and two primary studies met the inclusion criteria. Four out of seven included systematic reviews concluded that no evidence exists for use of systemic antibiotics to improve the clinical outcomes in surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. One review did not estimate the level of evidence, one did not clearly state any beneficial effect, whereas one reported a limited adjunctive effect. Further, the two included primary studies did not show a long-term significant benefit of adjunctive use of systemically administrated antibiotics. However, one study reported a short-term adjunctive effect in patients with modified surface implants. Due to heterogeneity in study design, low number of included primary studies, and grade of bias, no meta-analysis was performed.

conclusionThe use of systemically administered antibiotics as an adjunct to surgical interventions of peri-implantitis cannot be justified as a part of a standard treatment protocol. A pervasive problem is the lack of uniform diagnosis criteria for peri-implantitis, deficient information about patient characteristics, absence of high quality long-term randomised controlled trials, and authors' declaration on conflict of interest.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsPeri-ImplantitisAnti-Bacterial AgentsCase-Control StudiesHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsDental ImplantsDental implant surgeryHumansPeri-implantitisSystematic reviewSystemic antibioticsTherapy

Identifiers

PMID34961495
PMCPMC8711198
OpenAlexW4200220706

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.