Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Introduction Smokers have a higher chance of developing peri-implant diseases and are therefore considered an at-risk population. Our aim was to compare peri-implant characteristics in users of electronic cigarettes (EC), waterpipes (WP), cigarettes (CS), smokeless tobacco (ST), and non-smokers (non-users of any nicotine and tobacco product; NS). Methods A systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL) was performed until April 2023, restricted to English language. Thirty-nine observational studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 32 studies were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Using a predesigned form, two researchers independently collected data about marginal bone loss (MBL), probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified plaque index (mPI), probing pocket depth > 4mm (PPD>4), gingival index (GI), peri-implant sulcular fluid (PISF) volume, and TNF-α and IL-1β levels. QUIPS and CINeMA were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Results NS had the smallest MBL. Most nicotine-containing product users had significantly higher MBL (CS, MD:1.34 CrI: 0.85, 1.79; WP, MD:1.58 CrI: 0.84, 2.35; ST, MD:2.53, CrI: 1.20, 3.87) than NS. EC did not show significant difference compared to NS (MD:0.52 CrI: -0.33, 1.36). In secondary outcomes NS were ranked in first place. Subset analysis based on smoking habit, implant duration, and maintenance control revealed no differences in ranking probability. Conclusion Most nicotine-containing product users presented worse peri-implant parameters compared to non-smokers, while EC users did not show significant differences to NS in many outcomes. Implication Alternative nicotine-containing products are gaining popularity and are often considered less harmful by the general public compared to traditional cigarettes. This is the first network meta-analysis comparing users of four nicotine-containing products and non-smokers. This study shows that CS, WP and ST have a detrimental effect on the overall health of peri-implant tissues. EC users also presented inferior parameters compared to NS, however, the difference was not significant in many outcomes. It is essential to educate patients who are using nicotine-containing products, and to provide proper maintenance and appropriate cessation support. Well-designed multi-armed studies are needed for direct comparison of different products, including heated tobacco products. Greater transparency of confounding factors is needed regarding smoking habit and oral hygiene.
Introduction Smokers have a higher chance of developing peri-implant diseases and are therefore considered an at-risk population. Our aim was to compare peri-implant characteristics in users of electronic cigarettes (EC), waterpipes (WP), cigarettes (CS), smokeless tobacco (ST), and non-smokers (non-users of any nicotine and tobacco product; NS). Methods A systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL) was performed until April 2023, restricted to English language. Thirty-nine observational studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 32 studies were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Using a predesigned form, two researchers independently collected data about marginal bone loss (MBL), probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified plaque index (mPI), probing pocket depth > 4mm (PPD>4), gingival index (GI), peri-implant sulcular fluid (PISF) volume, and TNF-α and IL-1β levels. QUIPS and CINeMA were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Results NS had the smallest MBL. Most nicotine-containing product users had significantly higher MBL (CS, MD:1.34 CrI: 0.85, 1.79; WP, MD:1.58 CrI: 0.84, 2.35; ST, MD:2.53, CrI: 1.20, 3.87) than NS. EC did not show significant difference compared to NS (MD:0.52 CrI: -0.33, 1.36). In secondary outcomes NS were ranked in first place. Subset analysis based on smoking habit, implant duration, and maintenance control revealed no differences in ranking probability. Conclusion Most nicotine-containing product users presented worse peri-implant parameters compared to non-smokers, while EC users did not show significant differences to NS in many outcomes. Implication Alternative nicotine-containing products are gaining popularity and are often considered less harmful by the general public compared to traditional cigarettes. This is the first network meta-analysis comparing users of four nicotine-containing products and non-smokers. This study shows that CS, WP and ST have a detrimental effect on the overall health of peri-implant tissues. EC users also presented inferior parameters compared to NS, however, the difference was not significant in many outcomes. It is essential to educate patients who are using nicotine-containing products, and to provide proper maintenance and appropriate cessation support. Well-designed multi-armed studies are needed for direct comparison of different products, including heated tobacco products. Greater transparency of confounding factors is needed regarding smoking habit and oral hygiene.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.