SynthesisNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2024
The Effect of Nicotine-Containing Products on Peri-Implant Tissues: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Vaping on Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Gingivitis, Periodontitis, and/or Peri-Implant Disease: A Systematic Review.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Pooled it
- An Umbrella Review of E-Cigarettes' Impact on Oral Microbiota and Biofilm Buildup.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of Xanthan-Based Chlorhexidine Gel in Peri-Implant Mucositis Treatment: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2026Trial
- Periodontal and Peri-Implant Status Among Users of Different Inhaled Tobacco and Nicotine Products: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Longitudinal comparison of peri-implant clinical and radiographic parameters between e-cigarette users and conventional cigarette smokers.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Influence of heat-non-burn tobacco aerosol on the microbiome of biofilm from human whole saliva bacteria in vitro.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Peri-Implant Health and Perfusion Parameters in Patients After Microvascular Jaw Reconstruction: A Clinical Cohort Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Article
- The Impact of Cigarette Smoking, Waterpipe Smoking, and E-Cigarette Vaping on Peri-Implant Clinical Outcomes and Inflammatory Markers: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of oral & maxillofacial researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSmokers have a higher chance of developing peri-implant diseases and are therefore considered an at-risk population. Our aim was to compare peri-implant characteristics in users of electronic cigarettes (EC), waterpipes (WP), cigarettes (CS), smokeless tobacco (ST), and nonsmokers (nonusers of any nicotine and tobacco product; NS). AIMS AND
methodsA systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL) was performed until April 2023, restricted to English language. Thirty-nine observational studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 32 studies were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Using a predesigned form, two researchers independently collected data about marginal bone loss (MBL), probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque index, bleeding on probing, modified plaque index, probing pocket depth > 4 mm (PPD > 4), gingival index, peri-implant sulcular fluid volume, and TNF-α and IL-1β levels. QUIPS and CINeMA were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence.
resultsNonsmokers had the smallest MBL. Most nicotine-containing product users had significantly higher MBL (CS, mean difference [MD]: 1.34 credible interval [CrI]: 0.85, 1.79; WP, MD: 1.58 CrI: 0.84, 2.35; ST, MD: 2.53, CrI: 1.20, 3.87) than NS. Electronic cigarettes did not show significant difference compared to NS (MD: 0.52 CrI: -0.33, 1.36). In secondary outcomes, NS were ranked in first place. Subset analysis based on smoking habit, implant duration, and maintenance control revealed no differences in ranking probability.
conclusionsMost nicotine-containing product users presented worse peri-implant parameters compared to NS, while EC users did not show significant differences to NS in many outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: Alternative nicotine-containing products are gaining popularity and are often considered less harmful by the general public compared to traditional cigarettes. This is the first network meta-analysis comparing users of four nicotine-containing products and NS. This study shows that CS, WP, and ST have a detrimental effect on the overall health of peri-implant tissues. EC users also presented inferior parameters compared to NS; however, the difference was not significant in many outcomes. It is essential to educate patients who are using nicotine-containing products, and to provide proper maintenance and appropriate cessation support. Well-designed multiarmed studies are needed for direct comparison of different products, including heated tobacco products. Greater transparency of confounding factors is needed regarding smoking habit and oral hygiene.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.