2012Journal Of Clinical PeriodontologyRequires access

Differences in peri‐implant conditions between fully and partially edentulous subjects: a systematic review

Yvonne C. M. de Waal, A.J. van Winkelhoff, Henny J. A. Meijer, Gerry M. Raghoebar, E. G. Winkel

Open publisher page 51 citations

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare peri-implant conditions between fully edentulous (FES) and partially edentulous subjects (PES). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched for publications up to January 1st 2012. Studies reporting on the bleeding tendency of the peri-implant mucosa and/or studies reporting on the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis were considered. RESULTS: Fifty-five publications describing 46 studies were selected. One study described both FES and PES, and all other studies described either FES or PES. Subgroup analyses were performed according to dental status (fully/partially edentulous), follow-up time (≥5 years and ≥ 10 years) and study design (prospective/cross-sectional). FES harboured more plaque at their implants than PES. Modified bleeding index scores were significantly higher in FES, but no differences in bleeding on probing, implant loss and probing pocket depth were observed between FES and PES. No meta-analysis could be performed on prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Overall prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0-3.4% after 5 years and 5.8-16.9% after 10 years of implant evaluation. CONCLUSION: FES and PES show comparable implant survival rates. However, no conclusion can be drawn regarding differences in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between FES and PES.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare peri-implant conditions between fully edentulous (FES) and partially edentulous subjects (PES). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched for publications up to January 1st 2012. Studies reporting on the bleeding tendency of the peri-implant mucosa and/or studies reporting on the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis were considered. RESULTS: Fifty-five publications describing 46 studies were selected. One study described both FES and PES, and all other studies described either FES or PES. Subgroup analyses were performed according to dental status (fully/partially edentulous), follow-up time (≥5 years and ≥ 10 years) and study design (prospective/cross-sectional). FES harboured more plaque at their implants than PES. Modified bleeding index scores were significantly higher in FES, but no differences in bleeding on probing, implant loss and probing pocket depth were observed between FES and PES. No meta-analysis could be performed on prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Overall prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0-3.4% after 5 years and 5.8-16.9% after 10 years of implant evaluation. CONCLUSION: FES and PES show comparable implant survival rates. However, no conclusion can be drawn regarding differences in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between FES and PES.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 51 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare peri-implant conditions between fully edentulous (FES) and partially edentulous subjects (PES). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched for publications up to January 1st 2012. Studies reporting on the bleeding tendency of the peri-implant mucosa and/or studies reporting on the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis were considered. RESULTS: Fifty-five publications describing 46 studies were selected. One study described both FES and PES, and all other studies described either FES or PES. Subgroup analyses were performed according to dental status (fully/partially edentulous), follow-up time (≥5 years and ≥ 10 years) and study design (prospective/cross-sectional). FES harboured more plaque at their implants than PES. Modified bleeding index scores were significantly higher in FES, but no differences in bleeding on probing, implant loss and probing pocket depth were observed between FES and PES. No meta-analysis could be performed on prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Overall prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0-3.4% after 5 years and 5.8-16.9% after 10 years of implant evaluation. CONCLUSION: FES and PES show comparable implant survival rates. However, no conclusion can be drawn regarding differences in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between FES and PES.

Key concepts: Mucositis, Medicine, Peri-implantitis, Dentistry, Bleeding on probing, Implant, Meta-analysis, Subgroup analysis

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Differences in peri‐implant conditions between fully and partially edentulous subjects: a systematic review — Research Paper | ScholarLens