SynthesisClinical implant dentistry and related research2026
Prevalence of Peri-Implantitis Around Zirconia Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Evidence.
Synthesis in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundZirconia implants (ZIs) have emerged as a metal-free alternative to titanium implants (TIs) because of their favorable esthetic and biological properties. However, the prevalence of peri-implantitis associated with ZIs and the potential influence of implant material on peri-implant disease remain unclear.
objectiveTo estimate the implant-level prevalence of peri-implantitis associated with ZIs and to assess whether implant material influences peri-implantitis prevalence by comparing ZIs and TIs.
methodsElectronic searches were conducted in four databases and gray literature sources up to February 2026. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating peri-implantitis associated with ZIs were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled peri-implantitis prevalence at the implant level. Subgroup analyses according to follow-up duration and sensitivity analyses were additionally conducted.
resultsNineteen studies comprising 687 patients and 995 implants were included. The mean follow-up reported across studies was approximately 49 months. In studies with follow-up ≤ 3 years, the pooled prevalence of peri-implantitis associated with ZIs was 2% (95% CI: 0%-6%; I
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests a low short- to mid-term implant-level prevalence of peri-implantitis around ZIs, with higher estimates observed in studies with longer follow-up. However, the certainty of evidence remains limited because of methodological heterogeneity, variability in diagnostic definitions, inconsistent patient-level reporting, and the lack of long-term comparative studies. Limited comparative evidence did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in peri-implantitis prevalence between ZIs and TIs.
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.