ArticleBMC oral health2026
Longitudinal comparison of peri-implant clinical and radiographic parameters between e-cigarette users and conventional cigarette smokers.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConventional cigarette smoking is associated with peri-implant disease, but longitudinal evidence for electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) exposure is limited. We compared 12-month peri-implant clinical and radiographic trajectories between e-cigarette users and conventional cigarette smokers and assessed unequal current exposure duration.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included 328 patients with 452 implants (e-cigarette [EC] group, 152 patients/206 implants; conventional cigarette [CS] group, 176/246). Modified plaque index (mPLI), probing depth (PD), modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI), bleeding on probing (BOP), mucosal recession (MR), keratinized mucosa width (KMW), and marginal bone level (MBL) were recorded at loading, 6 months, and 12 months while implants remained in situ. Patient-clustered generalized estimating equations (GEE) assessed group, time, and group-by-time effects. PD and change in MBL (ΔMBL) were prioritized. A post hoc sensitivity model additionally adjusted for current exposure duration; product-specific intensity variables were examined within groups.
resultsContinuous outcomes were available for 452, 448, and 440 implants at loading, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively; all 12 removals were entered into failure analyses. Current exposure duration was shorter among e-cigarette users (median, 3.0 vs. 12.0 years). At 12 months, mean PD was 3.18 versus 3.72 mm, and mean ΔMBL was 0.68 versus 1.01 mm. After duration adjustment, conventional cigarette exposure remained associated with greater PD (difference, 0.42 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.59; interaction P = 0.003) and ΔMBL (0.26 mm; 95% CI, 0.15-0.37; interaction P = 0.015). The crude mucositis association attenuated after parsimonious adjustment (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.02-2.90; P = 0.043; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 0.98-2.75; P = 0.060). Peri-implantitis and post-loading failure comparisons were not statistically significant.
conclusionsConventional cigarette exposure was associated with larger 12-month peri-implant changes than e-cigarette exposure. Unequal exposure duration, unmeasured previous smoking, self-reported exposure, device heterogeneity, informative implant removal, and absence of a never-smoker group limit causal and absolute-risk interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.