» Articles » PMID: 21834862

Network Meta-analysis for Evaluating Interventions in Implant Dentistry: the Case of Peri-implantitis Treatment

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2011 Aug 13
PMID 21834862
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background/aim: Evidence from head-to-head comparison trials on peri-implantitis treatment is limited, and it is therefore impossible to conduct a direct meta-analysis. We propose an alternative statistical method, network meta-analysis, for evidence synthesis, which enables to compare the results of multiple treatments.

Methods: We searched, in triplicate, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials in the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases up to and including August 2010. We also conducted a manual search of the reference lists regarding published systematic reviews and searched for gray literature in OpenSIGLE. We assessed changes in clinical attachment level (CAL) and pocket probing depth (PPD) after nonsurgical and surgical treatments of peri-implantitis. The risk of bias of selected studies was determined by the use of specific criteria, and it was performed in triplicate and independently. We used multilevel mixed modeling to perform the network meta-analysis and Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation to obtain confidence intervals for the fixed and random effects.

Results: Eleven studies were included in the review. All RCTs are at unclear or high risk of bias. Surgical therapy in conjunction with bone grafts and non-resorbable membranes achieved 3.52 mm greater PPD reduction than nonsurgical therapy alone, 95% high-probability density (HPD) intervals: -0.19, 6.81. Surgical treatment in conjunction with bone grafts and resorbable membranes achieved 2.80 mm greater CAL gain than nonsurgical therapy alone, 95% HPD intervals: -0.18, 5.59.

Conclusion: Surgical procedures in peri-implantitis treatment achieve more PPD reduction and CAL gain than nonsurgical approaches. Nevertheless, these results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of studies included and their low methodological quality. Network meta-analysis is a useful statistical methodology for evidence synthesis and to summarize the strength and limitation in the current evidence.

Citing Articles

Peri-Implantitis.

Ting M, Suzuki J Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(8).

PMID: 39195095 PMC: 11352821. DOI: 10.3390/dj12080251.


Efficacy of surgical methods for peri-implantitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Cheng J, Chen L, Tao X, Qiang X, Li R, Ma J BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):227.

PMID: 37076816 PMC: 10116816. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-02956-6.


Local and Systemic Antibiotics in Peri-Implantitis Management: An Umbrella Review.

Boccia G, Di Spirito F, DAmbrosio F, Di Palo M, Giordano F, Amato M Antibiotics (Basel). 2023; 12(1).

PMID: 36671315 PMC: 9854519. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12010114.


Antibiotic Resistance in Patients with Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Ardila C, Vivares-Builes A Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(23).

PMID: 36497685 PMC: 9737312. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192315609.


Non-surgical peri-implantitis treatment with or without systemic antibiotics: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Polymeri A, van der Horst J, Moin D, Wismeijer D, Loos B, Laine M Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022; 33(5):548-557.

PMID: 35238084 PMC: 9314590. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13914.