ReviewClinical oral investigations2024
Experimental models for peri-implant diseases: a narrative review.
Review in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in oral disease models: a mini-review of developments from 2015 to 2025.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
- Insights into periodontal disease: comparative analysis of animal models.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPeri-implant diseases, being the most common implant-related complications, significantly impact the normal functioning and longevity of implants. Experimental models play a crucial role in discovering potential therapeutic approaches and elucidating the mechanisms of disease progression in peri-implant diseases. This narrative review comprehensively examines animal models and common modeling methods employed in peri-implant disease research and innovatively summarizes the in vitro models of peri-implant diseases. MATERIALS AND
methodsArticles published between 2015 and 2023 were retrieved from PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Embase. All studies focusing on experimental models of peri-implant diseases were included and carefully evaluated.
resultsVarious experimental models of peri-implantitis have different applications and advantages. The dog model is currently the most widely utilized animal model in peri-implant disease research, while rodent models have unique advantages in gene knockout and systemic disease induction. In vitro models of peri-implant diseases are also continuously evolving to meet different experimental purposes.
conclusionsThe utilization of experimental models helps simplify experiments, save time and resources, and promote advances in peri-implant disease research. Animal models have been proven valuable in the early stages of drug development, while technological advancements have brought about more predictive and relevant in vitro models. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This review provides clear and comprehensive model selection strategies for researchers in the field of peri-implant diseases, thereby enhancing understanding of disease pathogenesis and providing possibilities for developing new treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38884808What 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.