OR Foundation
  • About
    • Oral Reconstruction Foundation
      • Purpose and Mission
      • Foundation Board
      • Scientific Working Group
      • Education Working Group
      • History
      • Career
      • News
  • Granting
  • Publications
    • Grant Publications
    • Consensus Publications
  • Awards
    • Research Award
      • Awards 2018/2019
      • Award 2016/2017
      • Award 2014/2015
      • Award 2012/2013
      • Award 2010/2011
      • Award 2008/2009
    • Poster Competition
      • Competition 2024
      • Competition 2018
      • Competition 2016
      • Competition 2014
      • Competition 2012
  • Education
    • International Symposia
    • Global Symposia
    • National Symposia
    • Education Courses
    • Webinars
  • Contact
Select Page

Impact of implant-abutment connection and positioning of the machined collar/ microgap on crestal bone level changes: a systematic review.


Schwarz F, Hegewald A, Becker J

Clin Oral Impl Res 2014;25:417-25

Abstract

Objective:

To address the following focused question: What is the impact of implant–abutment configuration and the positioning of the machined collar/microgap on crestal bone level changes?

Material and methods:

Electronic databases of the PubMed and the Web of Knowledge were searched for animal and human studies reporting on histological/radiological crestal bone level changes (CBL) at nonsubmerged one-/two-piece implants (placed in healed ridges) exhibiting different abutment configurations, positioning of the machined collar/microgap (between 1992 and November 2012: n = 318 titles). Quality assessment of selected full-text articles was performed according to the ARRIVE and CONSORT statement guidelines.

Results:

A total of 13 publications (risk of bias: high) were eligible for the review. The weighted mean difference (WMD) (95% CI) between machined collars placed either above or below the bone crest amounted to 0.835 mm favoring an epicrestal positioning of the rough/smooth border (P < 0.001) (P-value for heterogeneity: 0.885, I2: 0.000% = no heterogeneity). WMD (95% CI) between microgaps placed either at or below the bone crest amounted to −0.479 mm favoring a subcrestal position of the implant neck (P < 0.001) (P-value for heterogeneity: 0.333, I2: 12.404% = low heterogeneity). Only two studies compared different implant–abutment configurations. Due to a high heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not feasible.

Conclusion:

While the positioning of the machined neck and microgap may limit crestal bone level changes at nonsubmerged implants, the impact of the implant–abutment connection lacks documentation.

SOURCE

  • Facebook
  • X
  • Instagram
  • RSS

© Oral Reconstruction Foundation 2026 | Imprint | Disclaimer | Privacy | Sitemap | Professional websites Basel