Background
Methods
Focused question
Population and exposure
Disease determinants, risk factors, and etiologic agents
Study follow-up duration
Types of studies
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Search strategy
Database/journal | Search strategy | Items found | |
---|---|---|---|
Electronic searching | Medline | #1 [All Fields] AND #2 [All Fields] AND #3[All Fields] | 24 |
Embase | #1:ti, ab, kw AND #2:ti, ab, kw AND #3:ti, ab, kw | 10 | |
Web of Science | TS = #1 AND TS = #2 AND TS = #3 | 11 | |
Cochrane Library | #1:ti, ab, kw AND #2:ti, ab, kw AND #3:ti, ab, kw | 1 | |
Scopus | TITLE-ABS-KEY (#1) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (#2) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (#3) | 11 | |
Manual searching | Journal of Periodontology | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 |
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 3 | |
Clinical Oral Implants Research | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 | |
Journal of Clinical Periodontology | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 | |
British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 | |
Clinical Oral Investigations | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 | |
Journal of Dentistry | #1 AND #2 AND #3 | 1 |
Study selection
Data extraction and management
Study | Gonzalo Hernandez (2012) | Pia López-Jornet (2014) |
---|---|---|
Age (year) | Median (range) 53.7 (38–73)/52.2 (35–70) | Median (range) 64.5 (44–76)/42 (29–79) |
OLPG/ CG | 18/18 | 16/16 |
Male/Female | 10/26 | 14/18 |
No. of implants | 56/60 | 56/50 |
Definition of OLP | Clinical and histopathological criteria of OLP according to the modified WHO diagnostic criteria of OLP | OLP was diagnosed based on a thorough clinical examination and histopathology of the lesions |
Definition of PIM and PI | The presence of PIM (BOP, PD ≥ 4 mm and no BL) and PI (BOP or pus, BL ≥ 3 threads at the final examination) | Diagnosis of PIDs based on clinical indicators (e.g. CAL, PD, BL) |
Follow-up time (months) | Median (IR): 56.5 (22)/52.5 (22.7) | Median (range): 42 (12–120)/48 (24–48) |
PD (mm): | PD (mm): n:< 4 mm 23/18; ≥4 mm 33/42 | PD (mm): median (range): 3.00 (1.12–4.90)/3.00 (2–5) |
BOP | (sites): 105/114; (implants): 36/44; patients: 13/16 | (No. implants): 12/11 |
BL | BL (mm): ≤1.7 18/22; 1.8–2.4 24/24; 2.5–3 8/9; 3.1–3.6 4/3; ≥3.7:2/2 | (No. of implants): 10/8; |
PIM (No. of implants) | 12/16 | 10/9 |
PI (No. of implants) | 5/4 | 14/8 |
Confounders controlled for | Smoking | Age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption, frequency of tooth brushing |
Key findings | Lichen planus was not a prominent local factor in the genesis of implant failure. | Implants did not influence manifestations of OLP. OLP was not a risk factor for peri-implantitis. |
Odds Ratio | _ | 1.32 (PI) |
95% Confidence Interval | _ | 0.81–2.14 (PI) |
p Value | .254 (PI)/.985 (PIM) | .257 (PI) |
Outcomes
Quality assessment
Data synthesis
Results
Search
Study characteristics
Location and sample characteristics
Risk of bias and methodological quality
Study | Selection (max 4 asterisks) | Comparability (max 2 asterisks) | Exposure (max 3 asterisks) | Score | Quality |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gonzalo Hernandez (2012) | *** | ** | ** | 7 | Low risk |
Items | Yes | No | Unclear |
---|---|---|---|
1) Define the information (survey, record review) | 1 | ||
2) List inclusion and exclusion criteria for exposed and unexposed subjects (cases and controls) or refer to previous publications | 1 | ||
3) Indicate time period used for identifying patients | 1 | ||
4) Indicate whether or not subjects were consecutive if population-based | 1 | ||
5) Indicate if evaluators of study subjects were blinded to other aspects of the status of the participants | 1 | ||
6) Describe any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes (e.g., test/retest of primary outcome measurements) | 1 | ||
7) Explain any patient exclusions from analysis | 0 | ||
8) Describe how confounding was assessed and/or controlled | 1 | ||
9) If applicable, explain how missing data were handled in the analysis | 0 | ||
10) Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection | 0 | ||
11) Clarity what follow-up, if any, was expected and the percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained | 1 |