Influence of abutment height on peri-implant marginal bone loss: an overview of systematic reviews with meta-analyses.

Authors

Cleber Davi Del Rei Daltro Rosa, Nathália Dantas Duarte, Marcelly Braga Gomes, Victor Augusto Alves Bento, Luiz Meirelles, Eduardo Piza Pellizzer

Published in

Odontology. Jun 15, 2026. Epub Jun 15, 2026.

Abstract

This overview aimed to critically synthesize existing findings, evaluate the consistency of evidence across systematic reviews with meta-analysis, and guide clinical decision-making regarding the relationship between abutment height and peri-implant marginal bone loss. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261340476) and conducted following the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines. The research question was: "What is the influence of abutment height on peri-implant marginal bone loss, and what is the level of confidence in the available evidence considering methodological quality, risk of bias, and overlap among systematic reviews with meta-analysis?" The search was performed in March 2026 across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, gray literature via ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and major journals in the field. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and the risk of bias was evaluated with the ROBIS tool. Overlap of primary studies across the systematic reviews was analyzed using an evidence matrix, the Corrected Covered Area (CCA), and the GROOVE tool. The databases found 836 records, and five systematic reviews with meta-analysis published between 2019 and 2025 were included. AMSTAR-2 indicated that two reviews were of low quality and three were critically low quality. According to ROBIS, three reviews were at high risk of bias, while two were at unclear risk. Overlap analysis revealed a covered area of 45.83% and a CCA of 32.29%, indicating very high overlap. A trend suggesting that abutments ≥ 2 mm are associated with lower peri-implant marginal bone loss was observed. However, due to the predominance of critically low methodological quality and risk of bias among the included reviews, these findings should be interpreted cautiously.

PMID:
42295534
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 15 Jun 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.