Influence of implant shape and prosthetic platform on cervical bone resorption: A systematic review




Cervical bone loss; Implant shape; Prosthetic platform; Dental implants.


Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the existing literature and answer the question, “Which implant format and prosthetic platform promotes the least cervical resorption?”. Material and method: SCOPUS, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, EMBASE, Lilacs, and Google Scholar databases were searched in September 2023. Results: The database search resulted in 2850 articles. Of the 12 articles selected for full reading, 2 remained in this systematic review. There is a lack of information to form an opinion and to perform statistical analysis of the data, so descriptive analysis was performed. Conclusions: Based on the studies included in this systematic review, the implant shape influences primary stability and osseointegration, but it is not yet possible to relate it directly to POC. However, the type of prosthetic platform has a direct influence. In addition to the type of prosthetic platform used, the various characteristics related to the shape of the implant must be considered to maintain satisfactory bone levels.


Camarda, A. J., Durand, R., Benkarim, M., Rompré, P. H., Guertin, G., & Ciaburro, H. (2021). Prospective randomized clinical trial evaluating the effects of two different implant collar designs on peri-implant healing and functional osseointegration after 25 years. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 32(3), 285-296.

Gago-García, A., Barrilero-Martín, C., Petrakakis, P., de Elio-Oliveros, J., Del Canto-Pingarrón, M., Alobera-Gracia, M. Á., & Seco-Calvo, J. (2021). Implant-prosthetic Rehabilitation with and without Platform Switching: A Retrospective Clinical Cohort Study. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 22(9), 1041-1047.

Juan-Montesinos, A., Agustín-Panadero, R., Solá-Ruiz, M. F., Marco-Pitarch, R., Montiel-Company, J. M., & Fons-Badal, C. (2022). Comparative Study by Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Peri-Implant Effect of Two Types of Platforms: Platform-Switching versus Conventional Platforms. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(6), 1743.

Abrahamsson, I., & Berglundh, T. (2009). Effects of different implant surfaces and designs on marginal bone-level alterations: a review. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 20, 207-215.

Aslam, A., & Ahmed, B. (2016). Platform-switching to preserve peri-implant bone: a meta-analysis. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 26(4), 315-319.

Fuda, S., Martins, B. G. D. S., Castro, F. C., Heboyan, A., Gehrke, S. A., Fernandes, J. C. H., Mello-Moura, A. C. V., & Fernandes, G. V. O. (2023). Marginal Bone Level and Clinical Parameter Analysis Comparing External Hexagon and Morse Taper Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Diagnostics (Basel), 13(9), 1587.

Annibali, S., Bignozzi, I., Cristalli, M. P., Graziani, F., La Monaca, G., & Polimeni, A. (2012). Peri-implant marginal bone level: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing platform switching versus conventionally restored implants. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 39(11), 1097-1113.

Atieh, M. A., Ibrahim, H. M., & Atieh, A. H. (2010). Platform switching for marginal bone preservation around dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Periodontology, 81(10), 1350-1366.

Rothamel, D., Heinz, M., Ferrari, D., Eissing, A., Holtmann, H., Schorn, L., & Fienitz, T. (2022). Impact of machined versus structured implant shoulder designs on crestal bone level changes: a randomized, controlled, multicenter study. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 8(1), 31.

Pera, F., Menini, M., Bagnasco, F., Mussano, F., Ambrogio, G., & Pesce, P. (2021). Evaluation of internal and external hexagon connections in immediately loaded full-arch rehabilitations: A within-person randomized split-mouth controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 23(4), 562-567.

Bittencourt, A. B. B. C., Neto, C. L. M. M., Penitente, P. A., Pellizzer, E. P., Dos Santos, D. M., & Goiato, M. C. (2021). Comparison of the Morse Cone Connection with the Internal Hexagon and External Hexagon Connections Based on Microleakage - Review. Prague Medical Report, 122(3), 181-190.

Lazzara, R. J., & Porter, S. S. (2006). Platform switching: a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry, 26(1), 9-17.

Kowalski, J., Lapinska, B., Nissan, J., & Lukomska-Szymanska, M. (2021). Factors influencing marginal bone loss around dental implants: a narrative review. Coatings, 11(7), 865.

Oliveira, H., Brizuela Velasco, A., Ríos-Santos, J. V., Sánchez Lasheras, F., Lemos, B. F., Gil, F. J., Carvalho, A., & Herrero-Climent, M. (2020). Effect of different implant designs on strain and stress distribution under non-axial loading: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(13), 4738.

Heimes, D., Becker, P., Pabst, A., Smeets, R., Kraus, A., Hartmann, A., Sagheb, K., & Kämmerer, P. W. (2023). How dental implant macrogeometry influences primary implant stability: A narrative review. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9(1), 20.

Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C., Welch, V. A., Whiting, P., & McKenzie, J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n160.

Pozzi, A., Agliardi, E., Tallarico, M., & Barlattani, A. (2014). Clinical and radiological outcomes of two implants with different prosthetic interfaces and neck configurations: randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 16(1), 96-106.

Gultekin, B. A., Gultekin, P., Leblebicioglu, B., Basegmez, C., & Yalcin, S. (2013). Clinical evaluation of marginal bone loss and stability in two types of submerged dental implants. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 28(3), 815-823.

Brånemark, P. I., Hansson, B. O., Adell, R., Breine, U., Lindström, J., Hallén, O., & Ohman, A. (1977). Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Supplementum, 16, 1-132.

Bedrossian, E., & Bedrossian, E. (2019). Treatment planning the edentulous mandible. Review of biomechanical and clinical considerations: an update. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants.

Maier, F. M. (2016). Initial Crestal Bone Loss After Implant Placement with Flapped or Flapless Surgery - A Prospective Cohort Study. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 31(4), 876-883.

Naeini, E. N., De Bruyn, H., Bronkhorst, E. M., & D'haese, J. (2023). Long-Term Effect of Guided Implant Surgery on Clinical Outcomes and Peri-Implantitis of Maxillary Implants - An Observational Cohort Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(13), 4432.

Vlahović, Z., Mihailović, B., Lazić, Z., & Golubović, M. (2013). Comparative radiographic and resonance frequency analyses of the peri-implant tissue after dental implants placement using flap and flapless techniques: an experimental study on domestic pigs. Vojnosanit Pregl, 70(6), 586-594

Bagde, H., Pawar, S. K., Hotchandani, K., Malik, N., Awasthi, V., & Patil, M. V. (2023). Healing of Peri-Implant Tissue following Flapless Implant Surgery. Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences, 15(Suppl 2), S1139-S1141.

Cahyaningtyas, N. A., Miranda, A., Metta, P., & Bawono, C. A. (2023). Dental implant macrodesign features in the past 10 years: A systematic review. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology, 27(2), 131-139.

Kreve, S., Ferreira, I., da Costa Valente, M. L., et al. (2022). Relationship between dental implant macro-design and osseointegration: a systematic review. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Vandamme, K., Naert, I., Geris, L., Sloten, J. V., Puers, R., & Duyck, J. (2007). Influence of controlled immediate loading and implant design on peri-implant bone formation. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 34(2).

Alshehri, M., & Alshehri, F. (2016). Influence of Implant Shape (Tapered vs Cylindrical) on the Survival of Dental Implants Placed in the Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review. Implant Dentistry, 25(6), 855-860.

Sargolzaie, N., Arab, H. R., & Moghaddam, M. M. (2017). Evaluation of crestal bone resorption around cylindrical and conical implants following 6 months of loading: A randomized clinical trial. European Journal of Dentistry, 11(3), 317-322.

Park, H., Moon, I. S., Chung, C., Shin, S. J., Huh, J. K., Yun, J. H., & Lee, D. W. (2021). Comparison of peri-implant marginal bone level changes between tapered and straight implant designs: 5-year follow-up results. Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science, 51(6), 422-432.

Gehrke, S. A., Júnior, J. A., Treichel, T. L. E., et al. (2022). Effects of insertion torque values on the marginal bone loss of dental implants installed in sheep mandibles. Scientific Reports, 12, 538.

Vandeweghe, S., Cosyn, J., Thevissen, E., Teerlinck, J., & De Bruyn, H. (2012). The influence of implant design on bone remodeling around surface-modified Southern Implants®. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 14(5), 655-662.

Cehreli, M., Sahin, S., & Akça, K. (2004). Role of mechanical environment and implant design on bone tissue differentiation: current knowledge and future contexts. Journal of Dentistry, 32(2), 123-132.

Nandini, N., Kunusoth, R., Alwala, A. M., Prakash, R., Sampreethi, S., & Katkuri, S. (2022). Cylindrical Implant Versus Tapered Implant: A Comparative Study. Cureus, 14(9), e29675.

Stoilov, M., Shafaghi, R., Stark, H., Marder, M., Kraus, D., & Enkling, N. (2023). Influence of Implant Macro-Design, -Length, and -Diameter on Primary Implant Stability Depending on Different Bone Qualities Using Standard Drilling Protocols - An In Vitro Analysis. Journal of Functional Biomaterials, 14(9), 469.

Sargolzaie, N., Arab, H. R., & Moghaddam, M. M. (2017). Evaluation of crestal bone resorption around cylindrical and conical implants following 6 months of loading: A randomized clinical trial. European Journal of Dentistry, 11(3), 317-322.

Askar, H., Wang, I. C., Tavelli, L., Chan, H. L., & Wang, H. L. (2020). Effect of Implant Vertical Position, Design, and Surgical Characteristics on Mucosal Vertical Dimension: A Meta-Analysis of Animal Studies. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 35(3), 461-478.

Vervaeke, S., Dierens, M., Besseler, J., & De Bruyn, H. (2014). The influence of initial soft tissue thickness on peri-implant bone remodeling. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 16(2), 238-247.

Suárez-López Del Amo, F., Lin, G. H., Monje, A., Galindo-Moreno, P., & Wang, H. L. (2016). Influence of Soft Tissue Thickness on Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Periodontology, 87(6), 690-699.




How to Cite

SOARES, V. de M. .; REIS, A. C. dos . Influence of implant shape and prosthetic platform on cervical bone resorption: A systematic review. Research, Society and Development, [S. l.], v. 13, n. 1, p. e1913144722, 2024. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v13i1.44722. Disponível em: Acesso em: 27 may. 2024.



Health Sciences