ReviewInternational journal of dentistry2026
A Systematic Review Comparing Marginal Bone Loss Around Convergent Abutments on Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Implants.
Review in International journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of peri-implant soft tissue thickness and its influence on marginal bone loss: A prospective clinical study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review Comparing Marginal Bone Loss Around Convergent Abutments on Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Implants.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants is a critical factor for long-term success. Convergent abutments have been suggested to improve peri-implant tissue stability. However, previous reviews have not specifically isolated the role of convergent abutments when comparing bone-level (BL) and tissue-level (TL) implant platforms. Therefore, this review aims to clarify whether the implant-abutment connection configuration (BL vs. TL) affects MBL when restored with convergent abutments. Objective: To systematically compare MBL around convergent abutments placed on BL versus TL implants. Methods: This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched up to May 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort, or case-control studies comparing MBL on convergent abutments for BL and TL implants. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Results: Seven studies (three RCTs and four cohort studies) involving 528 implants were included. Overall, TL implants with convergent abutments showed slightly lower MBL (mean 0.42 mm) compared to BL implants (mean 0.53 mm) after 1 year. Differences were statistically significant in three studies but considered clinically marginal. Risk of bias was moderate to low. Conclusions: Both BL and TL implants with convergent abutments demonstrate minimal MBL after 1 year, with a slight advantage for TL implants. Further long-term, high-quality RCTs are recommended to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.