ArticleOral health & preventive dentistry2025
Prevalence of Peri-Implant Diseases in a Private Practice and Potential Risk Indicators.
Article in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2025. 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.
- Cold atmospheric plasma for implant surface decontamination and osseointegration: a scoping review with implications for peri-implantitis management.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Detection and Classification of Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Using a Deep Learning Approach.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of peri-implant diseases and their potential risk indicators in a private practice setting. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional study evaluated data from 390 subjects (mean age 55.8 ± 11.6 years) with implant-supported prosthetic reconstructions, who were enrolled in a maintenance program for 6.25 ± 3.36 years. Clinical evaluation included peri-implant probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and full-mouth plaque scores (FMPS). Radiographic evaluation was performed using retro-alveolar radiographs for each implant. Further, smoking habits, history of periodontitis, or tooth loss due to periodontal disease, presence/absence of keratinized mucosa ≥ 2 mm and the quality of the prosthetic restoration were also assessed. The prevalence of the peri-implant disease (at the subject/implant level) was determined and various potential risk indicators were evaluated by multi-level logistic regression analysis.
resultsThe prevalence of peri-implant diseases was 37.7% and 23.3% at the subject and implant level, respectively. 14.3% of the subjects were diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis and 8.9% were diagnosed with advanced peri-implantitis (PI). PI was statistically significantly associated with poor (FMPS > 0.45, p 0.001) or moderate oral hygiene (FMPS: 0.3-0.45, p 0.001), a history of periodontitis (p 0.001), lack of keratinized tissue ≥2 mm (p 0.001) or implant function time > 5 years (p 0.001).
conclusionIn a private practice setting, a prevalence of peri-implant diseases of 37.7%/ 23.3% (subject/implant level) was found. Poor oral hygiene, history of periodontitis, a keratinized mucosa 2 mm and a time in function ≥ 5 years have been associated with the occurrence of peri-implant diseases.
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.