Cited by 1,302Dental Implant Techniques and OutcomesOral microbiology and periodontitis researchPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments

Peri‐implant health and disease. A systematic review of current epidemiology

Derks, Jan, Tomasi, Cristiano·2015·Journal of Clinical Periodontology

Abstract

Background: To develop preventive strategies addressing peri‐implant diseases, a thorough understanding of the epidemiology is required. Aim: The aim was to systematically assess the scientific literature in order to evaluate the prevalence, extent and severity of peri‐implant diseases. Material & Methods: Data were extracted from identified studies. Meta‐analyses for prevalence of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis were performed. The effect of function time and disease definition on the prevalence of peri‐implantitis was evaluated by meta‐regression analyses. Data on extent and severity of peri‐implant diseases were estimated if not directly reported. Results: Fifteen articles describing 11 studies were included. Case definitions for mucositis and peri‐implantitis varied. The prevalence of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis ranged from 19 to 65% and from 1 to 47%, respectively. Meta‐analyses estimated weighted mean prevalences of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis of 43% (CI: 32–54%) and 22% (CI: 14–30%), respectively. The meta‐regression showed a positive relationship between prevalence of peri‐implantitis and function time and a negative relationship between prevalence of peri‐implantitis and threshold for bone loss. Extent and severity of peri‐implant diseases were rarely reported. Conclusion: Future studies on the epidemiology of peri‐implant diseases should consider (i) applying consistent case definitions and (ii) assessing random patient samples of adequate size and function time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jcpe.12334

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Derks, J., & Tomasi, C.
Affiliations
University of Gothenburg (SE)
Corresponding author
Derks, Jan
Venue
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-31
Volume
42
Issue
S16
Pages
S158-71
ISSN
  • 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-051X
OpenAlex
W1966315031
Cited by
1,302
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 108 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 148 · 2023: 151 · 2022: 152 · 2021: 136 · 2020: 144 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 96 · 2017: 73 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 25 · 2012: 1
FWCI
8.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Keywords
peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, prevalence, dental implants, disease severity, disease extent, case definition, epidemiology
MeSH terms
Humans, Stomatitis, Global Health, Dental Implants, Prevalence, Alveolar Bone Loss, Peri-Implantitis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review