Does the implant-abutment interface interfere on marginal bone loss? A systematic review and meta-analysis

ROSA, Enéias Carpejani; DELIBERADOR, Tatiana Miranda; NASCIMENTO, Tuanny Carvalho de Lima do; KINTOPP, Cibele Cândida de Almeida; ORSI, Juliana Shaia Rocha; WAMBIER, Letícia Maíra; KHAJOTIA, Sharukh Soli; ESTEBAN FLOREZ, Fernando Luis; STORRER, Carmen Lucia Mueller

doi:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0068

Enéias Carpejani ROSA

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9482-0821

Tatiana Miranda DELIBERADOR

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4076-4905

Tuanny Carvalho de Lima do NASCIMENTO

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3552-4950

Cibele Cândida de Almeida KINTOPP

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5732-3829

Juliana Shaia Rocha ORSI

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7056-7422

Letícia Maíra WAMBIER

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9696-0406

Sharukh Soli KHAJOTIA

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Division of Dental Biomaterials, Department of Restorative Sciences, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8171-0474

Fernando Luis ESTEBAN FLOREZ

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Division of Dental Biomaterials, Department of Restorative Sciences, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8351-0721

Carmen Lucia Mueller STORRER

Universidade Positivo, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Curitiba, PR, Brazil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1188-8848

Corresponding Author: Carmen Lucia Muller Storrer E-mail: carmen.storrer@up.edu.br ; carmen.storrer@gmail.com

Declaration of Interests: The authors certify that they have no commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connection with the manuscript.

Scopus= 1187 (10/04/2018)
#1 (TITLE-ABS-KEY (mandible) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (maxilla) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“jaw edentulous”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“maxillary bone?”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“mandible bone?”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“mandibular bone?”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Maxillary implant?”))	#2 (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“dental implant?”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (“dental implant abutment design”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“dental abutment?”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Cone Morse”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“short dental implants”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Morse taper”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“internal connection”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“external connection”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“implant abutment connection”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“implant abutment connection”))
#1 AND #2 AND #3
Web of Science-3592 (10/04/2018)
#1	#2
TS=(Mandible) OR TS=(Maxilla) OR TS=(“jaw edentulous”) OR TS=(“maxillary bone?”) OR TS=(“mandible bone?”) OR TS=(“mandibular bone$”) OR TS=(“maxillary implant$”)	TS=(“dental implant?”) OR TS=(“dental implant abutment design”) OR TS=(“dental abutment$”) OR TS=(“Cone Morse”) OR TS=(“short dental implants”) OR TS=(“Morse taper”) OR TS=(“internal connection”) OR TS=(“external connection”) OR TS=(“implant abutment connection”) OR TS=(“implant abutment interface”)
#1 AND #2
Lilacs and BBO= 310 (10/04/2018)
#1 (MH: mandible OR MH:maxilla OR “jaw edentulous” OR “maxillary bones” OR “mandible bones” OR “mandibular bones” OR “maxillary implants” OR “arcada edêntulas” OR “osso maxilar” OR “ossos da mandíbula” OR “osso mandibular” OR “implantes maxilares” OR “arcada edéntula” OR “hueso maxilar” OR “huesos del mandíbula” OR “hueso del mandibular”)	#2 (MH:”dental implants” OR MH: “dental implant abutment design” OR MH: “dental abutments” OR “Cone Morse” OR “short dental implants” OR “morse taper” OR “dental implant” OR “internal connection” OR “external connection” OR “implant abutment connection” OR “implant abutment interface” OR “implantes dentários” OR “implante dental curto” OR “implante dental” OR “projeto do implante dentário pivô” OR “dente suporte” OR “conexão interna” OR “conexão externa” OR “interface implante pilar” OR “conexão implante pilar” OR “implantes dentales” OR “implantes dentales cortos” OR “pilares dentales” OR “diseño de implante dental pilar” OR “implante pilar dental con interfase” OR “implante pilar dental con conexión” OR “conexión interna” OR “conexión externa”)
#1 AND #2 AND #3
Cochrane Library = 961 (10/04/2018)
#4 MeSH descriptor: [Mandible] explode all trees #3 MeSH descriptor: [Maxilla] explode all trees mandible:ti,ab,kw or maxilla:ti,ab,kw or “jaw edentulous”:ti,ab,kw or “maxillary bones”:ti,ab,kw or #1”mandible bones”:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #2 mandibular next bones:ti,ab,kw or maxillay next implants:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #5 #4 or #3 or #1 or #2	MeSH descriptor: [Dental Implants] explode all trees. MeSH descriptor: [Dental Implant-Abutment Design] explode all trees MeSH descriptor: [Dental Abutments] explode all trees dental next implant:ti,ab,kw or “dental implant abutment design”:ti,ab,kw or dental next abutments:ti,ab,kw or “cone morse”:ti,ab,kw or “short dental implants”:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) “morse taper”:ti,ab,kw or “internal connection”:ti,ab,kw or “external connection”:ti,ab,kw or “implant abutment connection”:ti,ab,kw or “implant abutment interface”:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #6 or #7 or #8 or #9 or #10
#5 AND #11

Journal/Author/Year	Study Design	No. of subjects (total and per group)	No. of implants (total and per group)	Gender % male	Subjects age (range and mean ± SD)	%Mandible implants	%Maxillary implant	Type of prosthetic rehabilitation	Loadig protocol	Follow-up period	No. of implants lost per group.
Eur J Oral Implantol Arnhart et al./ 2012³²	Parallel	1yr /Total: 117 ICCᵞ:64 EHᶴ:53 3yr/Total: 89 ICCᵞ: 45 EHᶴ: 41	Total: 199 ICCᵞ: 117 EH ᶴ: 82	Male: 50.4%	ICCᵞ : N.R yrs (49.5±13.1) EH ᶴ: N.R yrs (49.9±13.6)	ICCᵞ: 70.94% EH ᶴ: 65.85%	ICCᵞ: 34(29.06%) EH ᶴ: 28(34.15%)	Total rehab. ICCᵞ: 5 EH ᶴ: 0 Partial rehab. ICCᵞ: 41 EH ᶴ: 39 Unitary rehab. ICCᵞ:71 EH ᶴ: 43	Immediate load	1 yr 3 yrs	1yr ICCᵞ: 4 EH ᶴ: 3 3yrs ICCᵞ: 4 EH ᶴ: 3
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Astrand et al./ 2004⁴⁴	Split-mouth	Total: 28 ICCᵍ : NR EHᵒ: NR	Total:150 ICCᵍ : 77 EHᵒ: 73	Male: 53.6%	36-76yrs (61.70±N.R)	N.R	ICCᵍ : 51.3% EHᵒ: 48.7%	Partial rehab. 100%	Late load	1 yr 3 yrs	1yr ICCᵍ: 1 EHᵒ: 2 3 yrs CCᵍ : 2 EHᵒ: 2
Implant Dent Bilhan et al./ 2010	Parallel	Total: 26 ICCᵐ : N.R EHᵒ: N.R ICCᵍ: N.R	Total: 107 ICCᵐ: 42 EHᵒ: 36 ICCᵍ : 29	Male: 34.6%	N.R yrs (50.82±N.R)	ICCᵐ:N.R EHᵒ: N.R ICCᵍ: N.R	ICCᵐ:N.R EHᵒ: N.R ICCᵍ: N.R	Partial rehab. 100%	Late load Immediate load	2 yrs	ICCᵐ: 0 EHᵒ: 0 ICCᵍ : 0
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Cehreli et al./ 2010	Parallel	Total: 22 ICCʷ: 12 EHᵒ: 10	Total 44 ICCʷ: 24 EHᵒ: 20	Male: 21.4%	N.R yrs (63.50±N.R)	ICCʷ: 50% EHᵒ: 50%	NR	Overdenture 100%	Early load	5 yrs	ICCʷ: 0 EHᵒ: 0
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Cooper et al./ 2016	Parallel	Total: 36 ICC ʲ: 18 EH º: 18	Total : 93 ICC ʲ: 47 EH º: 46	Male: 36.1%	N.R yrs (53.0±N.R)	ICC ʲ: 29.2% EH º: 22.9%	ICC ʲ: 16.7% EH º:20.8%	Unitary rehab. 100%	Late load	3 yrs	ICC ʲ: 2 EH º: 2
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Crespi et al./ 2009	Parallel	Total: 45 ICCꟸ: N.R EHʰ: N.R	Total 64 ICCꟸ: 30 EHʰ: 34	Male: 40.0%	25-67yrs (48.73±N.R)	ICCꟸ: 12 EHʰ: 12	ICCꟸ: 18 EHʰ: 22	Unitary rehab. 100% ICCꟸ: 30 EHʰ: 34	Immediate loading after tooth extraction.	1 yr 2 yrs	ICCꟸ: 0 EHʰ: 0
Eur J Oral Implantol Esposito et al./2016	Parallel	Total: 120 ICCᵇ: 60 EHᵇ: 60	Total: 203 ICCᵇ: 107 EHᵇ: 96	Male: 39.2%	ICCᵇ: 20-79yrs (54±13.4) EHᵇ: 25-74yrs (50.4±13.8)	ICCᵇ: 67(62.6%) EHᵇ: 58(60.4%)	ICCᵇ: 40(37.4%) EHᵇ: 38(39.6%)	Partial rehab. ICCᵇ: 31(51.7%) EHᵇ: 30(50.0%) Unitary rehab. ICCᵇ: 26(43.3%) EHᵇ: 30(50.0%) Overdenture. ICCᵇ: 2(2.3%) EHᵇ: 0	Late load Early load Immediate load	1 yr 5 yrs	1yr ICCᵇ: 2 EHᵇ: 1 ICCᵇ: 3 EHᵇ: 1
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Kaminaka et al./ 2015	Parallel	Total: N.R	Total: 23 ICC ᵞ: 12 EH ᵡ: 11	Male: 31.25%	ICCᵞ: 28-85yrs (53.8±N.R) EH ᵡ: 37-77yrs (63±N.R)	ICC ᵞ: N.R EH ᵡ: N.R	ICC ᵞ: N.R EH ᵡ: N.R	Unitary rehab. 100%	Late load	1 yr	ICC ᵞ: 0 EH ᵡ: 0
J Periodontol Koo et al./ 2012	Parallel	Total: 40 ICCᶲ: 20 Braᶲ: 20	Total: 40 ICCᶲ: 20 EHᶲ: 20	Male: 37%	Total: N.R yrs (52.2±N.R)	ICCᶲ: 11(55%) EHᶲ: 9 (45%)	ICCᶲ: 9(45%) EHᶲ: 11(55%)	Unitary rehab. 100%	Late load	1 yr	ICCᶲ: 0 EHᶲ: 0
J Clin Periodontol Meijer et al./ 2009^42,45	Parallel	Total: 60 ICCᵍ: 30 EHᵒ: 30	Total: 120 ICCᵍ: 60 EHᵒ: 60	Male: 70%	ICCᵍ: 38-74yrs (52.8±N.R) EHᵒ: 35-79yrs (56.6±N.R)	ICCᵍ: 50% EHᵒ: 50%	N.R	Overdenture 100%	Late load	1 yr 3 yrs 5 yrs 10 yrs	1yr ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ: 1 3yrs ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ: 1 5yrs ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ: 1 10yrs ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ: 1
Braz Dent J Melo et al./ 2017	Parallel	Total: 20 ICCᵅ: 9 EHᵅ: 11	Total: 40 ICCᵅ: 18 EHᵅ: 22	Male: 20%	Total: 42-75yrs (58.35±9.12)	ICCᵅ: 45% EHᵅ: 55%	N.R	Overdenture 100%	Immediate loading	1 yr	ICCᵅ: 1 EHᵅ: 0
Clin Oral Implants Res Moberg et al./ 2001	Parallel	Total:40 ICCᵍ: 20 EHᵒ: 20	Total: 208 ICCᵍ: 106 EHᵒ: 102	Male: 50%	ICCᵍ: 40.2-77.2yrs (64.0±6.8) EHᵒ: 44.2-75.2yrs (62.6±7.0)	ICCᵍ: 51% EHᵒ: 49%	N.R	Total rehab. 100%	Late load	3 yrs	ICCᵍ: 1 EHᵒ: 2
Clin Oral Implants Res Penarrocha-Diago et al./ 2013	Parallel	Total:15 ICC ᵠ: N.R EH ᵟ: N.R	Total:120 ICC ᵠ: 64 EH ᵟ: 56	N.R	N.R yrs	N.R	N.R	Total rehab. N.R Overdenture N.R	Late load	1 yr	ICCᵠ:1 EH ᵟ: 1
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Pessoa et al./ 2016	Split-mouth	Total: 12 ICCᵉ: NR EHᵉ: NR	Total: 24 ICCᵉ: 12 EHᵉ: 12	Male: 25%	Total: 48-75yrs (68.08±10.36)	ICCᵉ: 50% EHᵉ: 50%	N.R	Total rehab. 100%	Immediate loading.	1 yr	ICCᵉ:0 EHᵉ: 0
Eur J Oral Implantol Pozzi et al./ 2014	Split-mouth	Total:34 ICCᵞ: 34 EHᵡ: 34	Total: 88 ICCᵞ: 44 EHᵡ: 44	Male: 44.1%	Total: 39-59yrs (52.2±5.3)	ICCᵞ: 50% EHᵡ: 50%	N.R	Unitary rehab. ICCᵞ: 44 EHᵡ: 44	Late load	1 yr 3 yrs	ICCᵞ: 0 EHᵡ: 0
Clin Oral Implants Res Ravald et al./ 201343	Parallel	1yr Total: 66 ICCᵐ: 33 EHᵒ: 43 12 yrs Total: 46 ICCᵐ: 25 EHᵒ: 21	Total:362 ICCᵐ: 184 EHᵒ: 187	Male: 41.3%	ICCᵐ: 51-88yrs (73.1±N.R) EHᵒ: 66-88yrs (75.7±N.R)	ICCᵐ: 85(46.5%) EHᵒ: 80(42.8%)	ICCᵐ: 99(53.8%) EHᵒ: 107(57.2%)	Total rehab. 100%	Late load	1 yr 12 yrs	1yr ICCᵐ: 1 EHᵒ: 8 12yrs ICCᵐ: 8 EHᵒ: 10
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Pozzi et al./2012	Split-mouth	Total: 34 ICCᵞ : 34 EHᵡ: 34	Total: 88 ICCᵞ : 44 EHᵡ: 44	male: 15 Female: 19 Per group: N.R	39-59 yrs (52.2±5.3)	ICCᵞ: 50% EHᵡ: 50%	N.R	Unitary rehab. ICCᵞ : 44(50%) EHᵡ: 44(50%)	Late load	1yr	ICCᵞ : 0 EHᵡ: 0
J Prosthet Dent Kielbassa et al./2009	Parallel	Total: 117 ICC ᵞ: 64 EH ᶴ : 53	Total: 199 ICC ᵞ: 117 EH ᶴ : 82	Male: 59 ICCᵞ: 27 EH ᶴ: 32 Female: 58 ICCᵞ: 37 EH ᶴ: 21	17-79yrs (48.70±13.7)	ICC ᵞ:N.R EH ᶴ : N.R	ICC ᵞ: N.R EH ᶴ : N.R	Total rehab.	ICCᵞ: 5 EH ᶴ: 0 Partial rehab. ICCᵞ: 41 EH ᶴ: 39 Unitary rehab. ICCᵞ: 71 EH ᶴ: 43	Immediate loading.	1yr
J Clin Periodontol Meijer et al./ 2004	Parallel	Total:60 ICCᵍ : 30 EHᵒ: 30	Total: 120 ICCᵍ : 60 EHᵒ: 60	Male: 42 ICCᵍ: 18 EHᵒ: 24 Female: 18 ICCᵍ: 12 EHᵒ: 06	ICCᵍ: 38-74yrs (52.8±N.R) EHᵒ: 35-79yrs (56.6±N.R)	ICCᵍ : 50% EHᵒ: 50%	N.R	Overdenture 100%	Late load	1yr and 5yrs	ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ: 1
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Astrand et al./ 2002	Split-mouth	Total: 28 ICCᵍ : NR EHᵒ: NR	Total: 150 ICCᵍ 77 EHᵒ: 73	male: 15 Female: 13 Per group: N.R	36-76yrs (61.70±N.R)	N.R	ICCᵍ: 51.3% EHᵒ: 48.7%	Partial rehab 100%	Late load	1yr	ICCᵍ: 1 EHᵒ: 2
Clin Oral Implants Res Batenburg et al./ 1998	Parallel	total: 60 ICCᵍ: 30 EHᵒ: 30	total:120 ICCᵍ:60 EHᵒ:60	male: 27 Female: 63 Per group: N.R	35-79yrs (54.5±N.R)	ICCᵍ: 50% EHᵒ: 50%	N.R	Overdenture 100%	Late load	1yr	ICCᵍ: 0 EHᵒ:1
Eur J Oral Implantol Arnhart et al./ 2012 (REF)	Parallel	1yr /Total: 117 ICCᵞ:64 EH ᶴ:53 3yr/Total: 89 ICCᵞ : 45 EH ᶴ: 41	Total: 199 ICCᵞ: 117 EH ᶴ: 82	male: 50.4%	ICCᵞ : N.R yrs (49.5±13.1) EH ᶴ: N.R yrs (49.9±13.6)	ICCᵞ: 70.94% EH ᶴ: 65.85%	ICCᵞ: 34(29.06%) EH ᶴ: 28(34.15%)	Total rehab. ICCᵞ: 5 EH ᶴ: 0 Partial rehab.	ICCᵞ: 41 EH ᶴ: 39 Unitary rehab. ICCᵞ:71 EH ᶴ: 43	Immediate load	1yr 3yrs

JournalAuthor/Year	Marginal Bone Level (MBL) (Mean±SD)	Marginal Bone Loss (ΔMBL) (Mean±SD)	Mean probing depth (PD) (mean ± SD)	n (%) Survive rate absolute
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Astrand et al./ 2004⁴⁴	Baseline=Loading=Implant placement ICCᵞ: (-0.60±0.83) EH ᶴ: (-1.01±1.02) 1yr ICCᵞ: (-1.48±1.26) EH ᶴ: (-1.66±1.04) 3yrs ICCᵞ: (-1.41 ±1.54) EH ᶴ: (-1.18 ±0.91)	Baseline-1yr p: N.R ICCᵞ: (-0.95±1.37) EH ᶴ: (-0.64 ±0.97) Baseline-3yr p=0.0035 ICCᵞ: (-0.89 ±1.65) EH ᶴ: (-0.16 ±1.06) 1yr-3yr p= No significant ICCᵞ: (-0.06 ±1.32) EH ᶴ: (0.39 ±0.82)	N.R	1yr ICC ᵞ: 113 (96.6%) EH ᶴ: 79 (96.3%) 3yrs ICCᵞ: 80 (95.7%) EH ᶴ: 63 (96.3%)
Eur J Oral Implantol Arnhart et al./ 2012³²	Baseline=loading ICCᵍ : (1.4±0.33) EHᵒ: (1.8±0.11) 1yr ICCᵍ : (1.6±0.30) EHᵒ: (2.0±0.23) 3yrs ICCᵍ : (1.3±0.27) EHᵒ: (1.8±0.13)	Baseline-1yr not signicance ICCᵍ : (-0.2±0.16) EHᵒ: (-0.2±0.09) Baseline-3yrs not signicance ICCᵍ : (0.2±0.25) EHᵒ: (0.1±0.09) 1yr-3yrs ICCᵍ : (0.29±0.19) EHᵒ: (0.28±0.08)	N.R	1yr ICCᵍ: 76 (98.7%) EHᵒ: 71 (97.3%) 3yrs ICCᵍ : 75 (97.3%) EHᵒ: 71 (97.3%)
Implant Dent Bilhan et al./ 2010	Baseline=Implant placement=Loading ICCᵍ: N.R Implant placement ICCᵐ: N.R EHᵒ: N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading ICCᵐ: N.R EHᵒ: N.R	Baseline-2yr ICCᵐ: (0.66±0.1mm) p<0.05 EHᵒ: (1.1±0.1mm) p<0.05 ICCᵍ: (0.8±0.1mm) p>0.05	N.R	2yrs ICCᵐ: 42 (100%) EHᵒ: 36 (100%) ICCᵍ: 29 (100%)
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Cehreli et al./ 2010	Implant placement N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading N.R 5yrs N.R	Baseline-5yrs p=0.002 ICCʷ: (0.73±0.06) EHᵒ: (1.21±0.1)	N.R	5yrs ICCʷ: 24 (100%) EHᵒ: 20 (100%)
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Cooper et al./ 2016	Baseline= Implant Placement N.R loading N.R 1yr N.R 3yrs N.R	Baseline-loading ICC ʲ: (0.53±0.43) EH º:(1.11±0.91) Baseline-1yr ICC ʲ: (-0.48±0.55) EH º:(-0.68±1.2) Baseline-3yr ICC ʲ: (-0.25±0.60) EH º:(-0.50±0.93)	N.R	3yrs ICC ʲ: 45 (95.7%) EH º: 44 (95.6%)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Crespi et al./ 2009	Baseline=Implant placement=Loading N.R 1yr N.R 2yrs N.R	Tooth-Baseline p<0.001 ICCꟸ: (0.98±0.34) EHʰ: (0.99±0.38) Baseline-1yr p<0.001 ICCꟸ: (0.78±0.49) EHʰ: (0.82± 0.40) Baseline-2Yrs p<0.001 ICCꟸ: (0.73±0.52) EHʰ: (0.78± 0.45)	N.R	1yr ICCꟸ: 30 (100%) EHʰ: 34 (100%) 2yrs ICCꟸ: 30 (100%) EHʰ: 34 (100%)
Eur J Oral Implantol Esposito et al./2016	Baseline= Implant Placement ICCᵇ (0.10±0.24) EHᵇ (0.21±0.45) loading ICCᵇ (0.65±0.73) EHᵇ (0.79± 0.62) 1yr ICCᵇ (1.03±0.87) EHᵇ (1.23± 0.93) 5yrs ICCᵇ (1.28±1.11) EHᵇ (1.36± 1.04)	Baseline-loading p<0.001 ICCᵇ (0.56±0.67) EHᵇ (0.58±0.66) Baseline-1yr p<0.001 ICCᵇ (0.94±0.84) EHᵇ (1.00±1.03) Baseline-5yr p<0.001 ICCᵇ (1.21±1.09) EHᵇ (1.13±1.24)	Baseline/1yr/5yrs ICCᵇ: N.R EHᵇ: N.R	1yr ICCᵇ: 105 (98.13%) EHᵇ: 95 (98.9%) 5yr ICCᵇ: 104 (97.2%) EHᵇ: 95 (98.9%)
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Kaminaka et al./ 2015	Implant placement N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading ICC ᵞ: (0.04±0.84) EH ᵡ: (0.08±0.33) 1yr ICC ᵞ: (0.25±0.87) EH ᵡ: (1.94±0.87)	Baseline-1yr ICC ᵞ: (0.21±0.28) EH ᵡ: (1.85±0.90)	N.R	1yr ICC ᵞ: 11 (100%) EH ᵡ: 11 (100%)
J Periodontol Koo et al./ 2012	Baseline=Implant placement ICCᶲ: (0.24±0.30) EHᶲ: (0.25±0.38) Prosthesis delivery=Loading ICCᶲ: (0.31±0.36) EHᶲ: (0.85±0.40) 1yr ICCᶲ: (0.24±0.29) EHᶲ: (1.14± 0.54)	Baseline-Loading ICCᶲ: (0.08±0.30) EHᶲ: (0.61±0.37) Baseline-1yr ICCᶲ: (0.00±0.28) EHᶲ: (0.90±0.53) Loading-1yr ICCᶲ: (-0.07±0.21) EHᶲ: (0.29±0.35)	N.R	1yr ICCᶲ: 20 (100%) EHᶲ: 20 (100%)
J Clin Periodontol Meijer et al./ 2009 (42,45)	Implant placement N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading N.R 1yr N.R 2yrs N.R 3yrs N.R 5yrs N.R 10yrs N.R	Baseline-1yr not significance ICCᵍ: (0.3±0.6) EHᵒ: (0.2±0.7) Baseline-2yrs not significance ICCᵍ : (0.5±0.7) EHᵒ: (0.6±1.1) Baseline-3yrs not significance ICCᵍ : (0.5±0.8) EHᵒ: (0.4±0.9) Baseline-5yrs not significance ICCᵍ: (0.9±0.9) EHᵒ: (0.7±0.8) Baseline-10yrs significant ICCᵍ: (1.3±1.1) EHᵒ: (0.7±0.5)	Baseline p<0.001 ICCᵍ : (2.6±0.6) EHᵒ: (3.3±0.8) 1 yr p<0.001 ICCᵍ: (2.5±0.5) EHᵒ: (3.1±0.6) 5 yrs p<0.001 ICCᵍ: (2.3±0.6) EHᵒ: (2.9±0.6) 10 yrs p<0.001 ICCᵍ: (3.3±1.0) EHᵒ: (3.0±0.5)	1yr ICCᵍ : 60 (100%) EHᵒ:59 (98.3%) 3yrs ICCᵍ : 60 (100%) EHᵒ:59 (98.3%) 5yrs ICCᵍ : 60 (100%) EHᵒ:59 98.3% 10yrs ICCᵍ: 60 (100%) EHᵒ: 59 (98%)
Braz Dent J Melo et al./ 2017	Baseline=Implantplacement=Loading	Baseline-1yr p=0.032 ICCᵅ (0.10±1.0) EHᵅ(0.85±0.82)	N.R	1yr ICCᵅ: 17 (94.4%) EHᵅ: 22 (100%)
	Implant MED Q₂₅ Q₇₅ LI LS
	ICCᵅ 0.12 -0.27 0.55 -2.59 1.83
	EHᵅ -0.34 -1.48 0.79 -1.78 1.90
	1yr
	ICCᵅ -0.73 -1.42 1.81 -2.14 2.54
	EHᵅ -1.28 -1.98 -0.31 -2.63 1.68
Clin Oral Implants Res Moberg et al./ 2001	N.R	N.R	N.R	3yrs ICCᵍ: 103 (96.8%) EHᵒ: 100 (97.9%)
Clin Oral Implants Res Penarrocha-Diago et al./ 2013	Implant placement N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading N.R 1yr N.R	Baseline-1yr ICC ᵠ: (0.12±0.17) EH ᵟ: (0.38±0.51)	N.R	1yr ICC ᵠ: 63 (98.6%) EH ᵟ: 55 (98.6%)
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Pessoa et al./ 2016	Baseline= Implant placement= loading ICCᵉ: (-0.54±0.34) EHᵉ: (-0.56±0.30)	Baseline-1yrs p< 0.001 ICCᵉ: (0.17±0.54) EHᵉ: (1.17±0.44)	1 yr p=0.12 ICCᵉ: 1.36±0.70 EHᵉ: 1.57±0.90	1yr ICCᵉ: 12 (100%) EHᵉ: 12 (100%)
Eur J Oral Implantol Pozzi et al./ 2014	Baseline=Implant placement ICCᵞ: (0.16 ±0.28) EHᵡ: (0.05±0.30) Prosthesis delivery=loading ICCᵞ: (0.54±0.28) EHᵡ: (0.99±0.38) 1yr ICCᵞ: (0.68±0.34) EHᵡ: (1.15± 0.34) 3yr ICCᵞ: (0.83±0.27) EHᵡ: (1.29± 0.42)	Baseline-loading p=0.000 ICCᵞ: (0.37±0.23 EHᵡ: (0.95±0.56) Baseline-1yr p<0.061 ICCᵞ: (0.51±0.34) EHᵡ: (1.10±0.52) Loading-1yr p>0.776 ICCᵞ: (0.14±0.20) EHᵡ: (0.16±0.19) Baseline-3yr p=0.000 ICCᵞ: (0.67±0.39) EH:ᵡ (1.24±0.47) Loading-3yr p=0.832 ICCᵞ (0.28±0.39) EHᵡ: (0.30±0.57)	N.R	1yr ICCᵞ: 44 (100%) EHᵡ: 44 (100%) 3 yrs ICCᵞ: 44 (100%) EHᵡ: 44 (100%)
Clin Oral Implants Res Ravald et al./ 2013 (43)	Implant placement N.R Baseline=Prosthesis delivery=Loading N.R 1yr N.R 5yrs N.R 12yrs N.R	Maxilla Baseline-1yr p: N.R ICCᵐ: (-0.22±0.14) EHᵒ: (-0.03±0.0) Mandible Baseline-1yr p: N.R ICCᵐ: (-0.31±0.16) EHᵒ: (-0.31±0.09) Baseline-12yrs p: N.R ICCᵐ (-0.67±1.18) EHᵒ (-0.42±0.81)	12yrs Frequency%	1yr ICCᵐ: 183 (99.5%) EHᵒ: 179 (95.7%) 12 yrs ICCᵐ: 176 ( 95.5%) EHᵒ: 177 (94.7%)
			1–3 mm 4–5 mm ≥6 mm
			ICCᵐ
			Maxillary 49 32 19
			Mandible 66 23 11
			EHᵒ
			Maxillary 47 50 3
			Mandible 70 26 4
			p-values: ICCᵐ maxillary vs. EHᵒ maxillary= 0.475.
			ICCᵐ mandible vs. EHᵒ mandible = 0.467.

[1] Corresponding Author: Carmen Lucia Muller Storrer E-mail: carmen.storrer@up.edu.br ; carmen.storrer@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

Does the implant-abutment interface interfere on marginal bone loss? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract