Authors: Farhan Raza Khan  ( Department of Surgery, The Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan. )
Syed Murtaza Raza Kazmi  ( Department of Surgery, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan. )
Yusra Fahim Siddiqui  ( Clinical Research Coordinator, Tabba Heart Institute, Karachi, Pakistan. )

Objective: To identify top 30 studies related to dental implant failures based on bibliometric analysis.

Methods: The bibliometric study was conducted at Aga Khan University, Karachi from April 2021 to June 2021 and comprised database search on Google Scholar used key words "dental implant failures" for studies published between 1990 and 2020. The selected studies were reviewed based on citation count for which the cut-off date was June 1, 2021.

Results: The top 30 papers on dental implant failures had median citation count of 153 (range: 41-1583. Most of the studies were retrospective 11(36.7%), followed by literature reviews 6(20%). The top three contributing journals were the 'International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants' 6(20%), the 'Clinical Oral Implants Research' 5(16.7%) and 'Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research' 3(10%). Goteborg University, Sweden, contributed the maximum number of most cited papers 8(26.7%).

Conclusions: Most of the papers in the top-cited on dental implant failures were retrospective studies, and there was only one clinical trial.

Keywords: Dental implants, Dental implant failure, Bibliometrics.

 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47391/JPMA.AKU-15

 

Introduction

 

Healthcare professionals update themselves with the current scientific literature using electronic media, conferences, textbooks and peer-reviewed journals.¹ The published scientific literature is growing exponentially and it is estimated that the volume of literature in health sciences doubles every 7 years.² This places the clinicians and researchers in a challenging situation of keeping abreast with the recent knowledge and practices^3,4 Bibliometric analysis helps the reader to recognise the most acknowledged articles on the topics of interest.⁵ It gives a snapshot of the must-read articles on the given topic. Different parameters are evaluated in the bibliometric analysis, including the citation analysis, which is a simple measure of counting the number of times a particular paper has been cited by other publications.⁶ It is a commonly evaluated parameter in bibliometrics. Papers which are recognised to have significant bearing on a discipline get acknowledged more than the other papers with less impact.⁷ Bibliometric analysis identifies variables such as country, institutions, authors and journals contributing to the discipline of interest.^8,9 All of this helps the researchers in designing further studies and thus contributing to the scientific enquiry.^10,11

With abundant literature already present in various specialties of Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing and Allied Health Sciences, an inquisitive mind might ask the question as to what makes an article a 'classic article'. The definition varies, but a citation count (CC) >400 is usually considered the cut-off.¹² In certain specialties, due to limited volume of literature, CC >100 may be considered classic.¹³ However, Giatsidis et al. suggested that rather than the CC, the citation density (CD) should be considered the valid parameter in evaluating the impact of an article.¹⁴

The current study was planned to identify top 30 studies related to dental implant failures based on bibliometric analysis which could be helpful in formulating the syllabus for short-listing the papers that can be recommended as a must-read or suggested-read in the residency programmes, seminars and journal clubs related to residency/fellowship training programmes in Prosthodontics, Oral Surgery or Implant Dentistry Implantology.

 

Materials and Methods

 

The bibliometric study was conducted at Aga Khan University, Karachi from April 2021 to June 2021 and comprised database search on Google Scholar used key words "dental implant failures" for studies published between 1990 and 2020. The citation analysis was carried out on June 1, 2021. Only English-language papers were considered, and there were no exclusions made based on study design. There were 18,900 hits on that search.

The title, year of publication, authors, CC, CD, key words, the name of institution and the country of the corresponding author were recorded. After the screening process, the articles were arranged in the descending order based on CC.

 

Results

 

The top 30 papers on dental implant failures had median citation count of 153 (range: 41-1583. Of the total, 4(13.3%) would be labelled as classic with CC >400 (Table-1).

 

 

The top three contributing journals were the 'International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants' 6(20%), the 'Clinical Oral Implants Research' 5(16.7%) and 'Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research' 3(10%), while the Goteborg University, Sweden, contributed the maximum number of the most cited papers 8(26.7%) (Table-2).

 

 

Most of the studies were retrospective 11(36.7%), followed by literature reviews 6(20%) (Table-3).

 

 

 

Discussion

 

Dental implants have been popularised by Dr Branemark, a Swedish orthopaedic surgeon and scientist.¹⁵ He revolutionised the field of Dental Implantology with the introduction of titanium-based endosseous dental implants and the discovery of the phenomenon of osseointegration. Dental implant has become a popular method of replacing teeth worldwide. To date, millions of people have benefitted from dental implants. However, despite high predictability in the outcome of implants, a small but important subset of patients do experience failure.^16,17 Subjects with osteoporosis, low bone volume, poor quality of bone, presence of metabolic bone disease, use of bisphosphonates and history of progressive periodontal disease etc. are at a greater risk of implant failure. Both the quality and quantity of bone that supports and surrounds the implant influence the osseointegration of implant.^18-20

Implant failures are categorised as early and late failures.²¹ Early implant failures are caused by poor bone quality, medically compromised patients, like those with uncontrolled diabetes, inadequate surgical technique, chronic drug or alcohol consumption, and smoking status, whereas late causes of failures are occlusal overload/excessive stress, peri-implantitis and poor oral hygiene, and defective implant components.^17,22,23. The most common reasons for late or delayed implant failure include implant overloading or fracture, and/or peri-implantitis.²²

Bibliometric analysis can serve as a useful tool for clinicians and researchers to appraise published literature on a given topic.⁷ The current study was carried out to identify the papers on dental implant failures that have the maximum impact on the knowledge and understanding of this topic. Ten out of the 30 top-cited papers on dental implant failures were from Sweden. This shows that Swedish researchers are at the forefront of research on dental implant and its failures.

Most of the papers in the top-cited list were retrospective studies and audits. It is logistically easier to carry out and publish retrospective studies as mostly there are no issues of funding associated with them. Moreover, the sample size or number of observations are usually higher, resulting in comparatively easier publication. In the present report, 11 of the 30 studies had retrospective study design. The importance of systematic reviews and meta-analysis cannot be underestimated, as they synthesise data from primary studies to yield the highest level of evidence that forms the basis of the evidence-based practice (EBP).^24,25 In the present report, there were 4 systematic reviews/meta-analyses. Two of them were conducted at Wuhan University, China.

Literature reviews and narrative reviews do not provide a high level of evidence, and they have inherent biases. Despite increasing emphasis on evidence-based dentistry (EBD), it is worrying to observe that in the present list, 6 articles were literature reviews. The lack of randomised controlled trial (RCTs) in the list is a matter of concern. Ideally, owing to the level of evidence generated, the clinical trials should be cited more than the retrospective studies.

The limitation of the current study is that it has listed the paper based on CC which actually reflects the popularity of a paper rather than its true clinical significance and the impact on practice. Moreover, starting the literature search from 1990 was an arbitrary starting point, mainly to cater to electronically published papers as prior to 1990, several journals had print-only editions. Some important papers published before the cut-off point could have made it to the top cited list but were left unattended. Lastly, non-English literature was ignored, making citations from non-English literature, especially from Chinese, South Korean or Brazilian publications, excluded.

 

Conclusions

 

The CC of the top 30 papers on dental implant failure ranged from 41 to 1583. Most of the papers in the top cited list were retrospective studies, followed by literature review and systematic reviews. There was only one clinical trial in the list.

Disclaimer: None.

Conflict of Interest: None.

Source of Funding: None.

 

References

 

1.       Scheckler WE. A realistic journal reading plan. The cornerstone of continuing medical education. JAMA 1982;248:1987-8.

2.       Tague J, Beheshti J, Rees-Potter L. The law of exponential growth: evidence, implications and forecasts. Libr Trends 1981;30:125-49.

3.       Venable GT, Shepherd BA, Roberts ML, Taylor DR, Khan NR, Klimo P Jr. An application of Bradford's law: identification of the core journals of pediatric neurosurgery and a regional comparison of citation density. Childs Nerv Syst 2014;30:1717-27. doi: 10.1007/s00381-014-2481-9.

4.       Venable GT, Shepherd BA, Loftis CM, McClatchy SG, Roberts ML, Fillinger ME, et al. Bradford's law: identification of the core journals for neurosurgery and its subspecialties. J Neurosurg 2016;124:569-79. doi: 10.3171/2015.3.JNS15149.

5        Wu Y, Jin X, Xue Y. Evaluation of research topic evolution in psychiatry using co-word analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e7349. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007349.

6        Zhang Q, Yue Y, Shi B, Yuan Z. A Bibliometric Analysis of Cleft Lip and Palate-Related Publication Trends From 2000 to 2017. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2019;56:658-69. doi: 10.1177/1055665618807822.

7        Liu B, Liu S, Alastra AJ, Mahato D, Tayag EC, Cortez VA, et al. The 100 Most Cited vs. Most Relevant Articles in the Journal of Neurosurgery: A Bibliometric Analysis. Cureus 2019;11:e4498. doi: 10.7759/cureus.4498.

8        Liu W, Zhang Y, Wu L, Yang X, Shi L. Characteristics and trends of oral leukoplakia research: A bibliometric study of the 100 most cited articles. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e16293. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016293.

9        Hui J, Han Z, Geng G, Yan W, Shao P. The 100 top-cited articles in orthodontics from 1975 to 2011. Angle Orthod 2013;83:491-9. doi: 10.2319/040512-284.1.

10      Ahmad P, Vincent Abbott P, Khursheed Alam M, Ahmed Asif J. A bibliometric analysis of the top 50 most cited articles published in the Dental Traumatology. Dent Traumatol 2020;36:89-99. doi: 10.1111/edt.12534.

11      Ordinola-Zapata R, Peters OA, Nagendrababu V, Azevedo B, Dummer PMH, Neelakantan P. What is of interest in Endodontology? A bibliometric review of research published in the International Endodontic Journal and the Journal of Endodontics from 1980 to 2019. Int Endod J 2020;53:36-52. doi: 10.1111/iej.13210.

12      Fardi A, Kodonas K, Gogos C, Economides N. Top-cited articles in endodontic journals. J Endod 2011;37:1183-90. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.05.037.

13      Jafarzadeh H, Sarraf Shirazi A, Andersson L. The most-cited articles in dental, oral, and maxillofacial traumatology during 64 years. Dent Traumatol 2015;31:350-60. doi: 10.1111/edt.12195.

14      Giatsidis C, Nikolentzos G, Zhang C, Tang J, Vazirgiannis M. Rooted citation graphs density metrics for research papers influence evaluation. J Informetr 2019;13:757-68. Doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.006.

15      Tjellström A. The father of Osseointegration and the godfather of the BAHA: Professor Per-Ingvar Brånemark, Göteborg Sweden has passed away in his 86th year. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015;272:779-80. doi: 10.1007/s00405-015-3581-1.

16.     Schwartz-Arad D, Laviv A, Levin L. Failure causes, timing, and cluster behavior: an 8-year study of dental implants. Implant Dent 2008;17:200-7. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3181777906.

17.     Sakka S, Coulthard P. Implant failure: etiology and complications. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011;16:e42-4. doi: 10.4317/medoral.16.e42.

18.     Listrom RD, Symington JM. Osseointegrated dental implants in conjunction with bone grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;17:116-8. doi: 10.1016/s0901-5027(88)80163-2.

19.     Lindquist LW, Carlsson GE, Jemt T. A prospective 15-year follow-up study of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical results and marginal bone loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:329-36. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070405.x.

20.     Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci 1998;106:527-51. doi: 10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x.

21.     Sakka S, Baroudi K, Nassani MZ. Factors associated with early and late failure of dental implants. J Investig Clin Dent 2012;3:258-61. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-1626.2012.00162.x.

22.     Manor Y, Oubaid S, Mardinger O, Chaushu G, Nissan J. Characteristics of early versus late implant failure: a retrospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:2649-52. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.07.050.

23.     Kronström M, Svenson B, Hellman M, Persson GR. Early implant failures in patients treated with Brånemark System titanium dental implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:201-7.

24.     Mulrow CD, Cook DJ, Davidoff F. Systematic reviews: critical links in the great chain of evidence. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:389-91. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00008.

25.     Swingler GH, Volmink J, Ioannidis JP. Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. BMJ 2003;327:1083-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7423.1083.