Long-term Predictive Value of Bleeding on Probing in Peri-Implantitis Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Xinbo Yu,Xinyan Lin,Feng Wang,Yiqun Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2024.102034

2024-01-01

Abstract:Objective : This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of bleeding on probing (BOP) for peri-implantitis detection on implant- and patient-levels, as reported in prospective and retrospective studies with at least 5 years of follow-up. Materials and Methods : A systematic search of three electronic databases was conducted and supplemented with a hand-search to identify clinical studies that reported the prevalence of peri-implantitis and BOP after at least 5 years of functional loading. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to combine the proportions of peri-implantitis among BOP positive implants and patients across studies. Heterogeneity was explored with subgroup analyses. Results : 5826 patients and 17198 implants were included in this review. Definitions of peri-implantitis varied between studies. Thirty studies were included for assessment. Implant-level meta-analysis was conducted in 24 studies and patient-level meta-analysis in 19 studies. Overall proportion of peri-implantitis in BOP-positive implants was 26.5% (95% CI, 21.2 to 32.1) and 35.1% (95% CI, 27.4 to 43.1) in BOP-positive patients. Substantial heterogeneity was present, and prediction intervals were 5.2-56% and 6.4-71.5% at the implant- and patient-level, respectively. Conclusion : Within the limitations, prevalence of peri-implantitis was found to be around one third in both BOP-positive implants and patients. Prevalence varied between studies. Although a guiding clinical factor in the diagnosis of peri-implantitis, clinicians should be aware of the significant false-positive rates of BOP.