The Effect of Nicotine-Containing Products on Peri-Implant Tissues: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

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 nonsmokers (nonusers of any n...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nicotine & tobacco research 2024-09, Vol.26 (10), p.1276-1285
Hauptverfasser: Vámos, Orsolya, Komora, Péter, Gede, Noémi, Hegyi, Péter, Kelemen, Kata, Varga, Gábor, Mikulás, Krisztina, Kerémi, Beáta, Kispélyi, Barbara
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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 nonsmokers (nonusers of any nicotine and tobacco product; NS). A systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and 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, bleeding on probing, modified plaque index, probing pocket depth > 4 mm (PPD > 4), gingival index, peri-implant sulcular fluid volume, and TNF-α and IL-1β levels. QUIPS and CINeMA were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Nonsmokers had the smallest MBL. Most nicotine-containing product users had significantly higher MBL (CS, mean difference [MD]: 1.34 credible interval [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. Electronic cigarettes 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. Most nicotine-containing product users presented worse peri-implant parameters compared to NS, while EC users did not show significant differences to NS in many outcomes. 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 NS. 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 multiarmed studies are needed for direct comparison of different products, including heated tobacco products. Grea
ISSN:1469-994X
1462-2203
1469-994X
DOI:10.1093/ntr/ntae085