Muñoz Viviana, Duque Andres, Giraldo Astrid, Manrique Ruben
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 Jul/Aug;33(4):e89-e105. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5940.
To compare changes in the prevalence of peri-implantitis when the unit of analysis is the subject and when the unit of analysis is the implant, by means of meta-analysis with subgroup and sensitivity analyses, according to the case definition and cutoffs. Periodontal probing depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were considered the primary variables.
Electronic and manual searches of observational studies of implants with loading of more than 6 months were conducted. The quality of the studies was evaluated, and finally, a description (qualitative analysis) and a meta-analysis (quantitative analysis) of the available studies were performed.
Fifty-five studies were included in this systematic review, 32 of which met the criteria for evaluation of disease based on PPD and BOP. A total of 2,734 subjects and 7,849 implants were evaluated. The prevalence of peri-implantitis, defined by PPD and BOP, was 17% when the unit of analysis was the subject, and 11% when it was the implant. If the clinical criterion was PPD ≥ 4 mm, the prevalence by subject was 34% and by implant 11%. If PPD was ≥ 5 mm, the prevalence by subject was 12% and by implant 10%. Finally, if the clinical criterion was PPD ≥ 6 mm, the prevalence by subject was 18% and by implant 10%.
The prevalence of peri-implantitis is influenced by the criteria used for the case definition, and the true prevalence may currently be incorrectly estimated.
通过亚组和敏感性分析的荟萃分析，根据病例定义和临界值，比较以受试者为分析单位和以种植体为分析单位时种植体周围炎患病率的变化。将牙周探诊深度（PPD）和探诊出血（BOP）视为主要变量。
对加载时间超过6个月的种植体观察性研究进行电子和手动检索。评估研究质量，最后对现有研究进行描述（定性分析）和荟萃分析（定量分析）。
本系统评价纳入55项研究，其中32项符合基于PPD和BOP的疾病评估标准。共评估了2734名受试者和7849颗种植体。以PPD和BOP定义的种植体周围炎患病率，以受试者为分析单位时为17%，以种植体为分析单位时为11%。如果临床标准为PPD≥4mm，受试者患病率为34%，种植体患病率为11%。如果PPD≥5mm，受试者患病率为12%，种植体患病率为10%。最后，如果临床标准为PPD≥6mm，受试者患病率为18%，种植体患病率为10%。
种植体周围炎的患病率受病例定义所用标准的影响，目前可能对真实患病率估计有误。
