Morse taper dental implants and platform switching: The new paradigm in oral implantology

 

PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to conduct a literature review on the potential benefits with the use of Morse taper dental implant connections associated with small diameter platform switching abutments. A Medline bibliographical search (from 1961 to 2014) was carried out. The following search items were explored: “Bone loss and platform switching,” “bone loss and implant-abutment joint,” “bone resorption and platform switching,” “bone resorption and implant-abutment joint,” “Morse taper and platform switching.” “Morse taper and implant-abutment joint,” Morse taper and bone resorption,” “crestal bone remodeling and implant-abutment joint,” “crestal bone remodeling and platform switching.” The selection criteria used for the article were: Meta-analysis; randomized controlled trials; prospective cohort studies; as well as reviews written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish languages. Within the 287 studies identified, 81 relevant and recent studies were selected. Results indicated a reduced occurrence of peri-implantitis and bone loss at the abutment/implant level associated with Morse taper implants and a reduced-diameter platform switching abutment. Extrapolation of data from previous studies indicates that Morse taper connections associated with platform switching have shown less inflammation and possible bone loss with the peri-implant soft tissues. However, more long-term studies are needed to confirm these trends.

• REFERENCES

• 1 Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindström J, Hallén O. et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 1977; 16: 1-132
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Albrektsson T, Donos N. Working Group 1. Implant survival and complications. The third EAO consensus conference 2012. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23 (Suppl. 06) 63-5
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 De Deus G, Camanho D, Mendes MC, Costa E, Souto C, Saliba FM. Evaluation of the degree of success Neodent implants, Implantology courses of UNESA/Rio de Janeiro- A retrospective study. Rev Implant News 2007; 4: 617-20
  Google Scholar
• 4 Jendressen MD, Allen EP, Bayne SC, Donovan TE, Hansson TL, Klooster J, Preston JD. Annual review of selected dental literature: Report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 74: 60-83
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 van Steenberghe D, Lekholm U, Bolender C, Folmer T, Henry P, Herrmann I. et al. Applicability of osseointegrated oral implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: A prospective multicenter study on 558 fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990; 5: 272-81
  Google Scholar
• 6 Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants in posterior partially edentulous patients. Int J Prosthodont 1993; 6: 189-96
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Barros RR, Novaes Jr AB, Muglia VA, Iezzi G, Piattelli A. Influence of interimplant distances and placement depth on peri-implant bone remodeling of adjacent and immediately loaded Morse cone connection implants: A histomorphometric study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 371-8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Choquet V, Hermans M, Adriaenssens P, Daelemans P, Tarnow DP, Malevez C. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of the papilla level adjacent to single-tooth dental implants. A retrospective study in the maxillary anterior region. J Periodontol 2001; 72: 1364-71
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Azzi R, Etienne D, Takei H, Fenech P. Surgical thickening of the existing gingiva and reconstruction of interdental papillae around implant-supported restorations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002; 22: 71-7
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest. J Periodontol 2000; 71: 546-9
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Buser D, Weber HP, Donath K, Fiorellini JP, Paquette DW, Williams RC. Soft tissue reactions to non-submerged unloaded titanium implants in beagle dogs. J Periodontol 1992; 63: 225-35
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Jokstad A, Braegger U, Brunski JB, Carr AB, Naert I, Wennerberg A. Quality of dental implants. Int Dent J 2003; 53: 409-43
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Schmitt CM, Nogueira-Filho G, Tenebaum HC, Lai JY, Brito C, Doring H, Nonhoff J. Performance of conical abutment (Morse taper) connection implants: A systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res A 2014; 102: 552-74
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Dibart S, Warbington M, Su MF, Skobe Z. In vitro evaluation of the implant-abutment bacterial seal: The locking taper system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20: 732-7
  Google Scholar
• 15 Ding TA, Woody RD, Higginbottom FL, Miller BH. Evaluation of the ITI Morse taper implant/abutment design with an internal modification. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 865-72
  Google Scholar
• 16 Erneklint C, Odman P, Ortengren U, Karlsson S. An in vitro load evaluation of a conical implant system with 2 abutment designs and 3 different retaining-screw alloys. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 733-7
  Google Scholar
• 17 Jansen VK, Conrads G, Richter EJ. Microbial leakage and marginal fit of the implant-abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 12: 527-40
  Google Scholar
• 18 O'Mahony A, MacNeill SR, Cobb CM. Design features that may influence bacterial plaque retention: A retrospective analysis of failed implants. Quintessence Int 2000; 31: 249-56
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Persson LG, Lekholm U, Leonhardt A, Dahlén G, Lindhe J. Bacterial colonization on internal surfaces of Brånemark system implant components. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996; 7: 90-5
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Quirynen M, Bollen CM, Eyssen H, van Steenberghe D. Microbial penetration along the implant components of the Brånemark system. An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1994; 5: 239-44
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Quirynen M, De Soete M, van Steenberghe D. Infectious risks for oral implants: A review of the literature. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13: 1-19
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Quirynen M, Papaioannou W, van Steenberghe D. Intraoral transmission and the colonization of oral hard surfaces. J Periodontol 1996; 67: 986-93
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. Bacterial colonization of the internal part of two-stage implants. An in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1993; 4: 158-61
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Quirynen M, Vogels R, Peeters W, van Steenberghe D, Naert I, Haffajee A. Dynamics of initial subgingival colonization of ‘pristine’ peri-implant pockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17: 25-37
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Larrucea VerdugoC, Jaramillu NunezG, Acevedo AvilaA, Larrucea San MartinC. Microleakage of the prosthetic abutment/implant interface with internal and external connection: In vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 1078-83
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Tenenbaum H, Schaaf JF, Cuisinier FJ. Histological analysis of the Ankylos peri-implant soft tissues in a dog model. Implant Dent 2003; 12: 259-65
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 D'Ercole S, Tripodi D, Marzo G, Bernardi S, Continenza MA, Piattelli A, Iacullli F, Mummolo S. Microleakage of bacteria in different implant-abutment assemblies: An in vitro study. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014; 19: 13
  Google Scholar
• 28 Gross M, Abramovich I, Weiss EI. Microleakage at the abutment-implant interface of osseointegrated implants: A comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14: 94-100
  Google Scholar
• 29 Mangano C, Mangano F, Piattelli A, Iezzi G, Mangano A, La Colla L. Prospective clinical evaluation of 1920 Morse taper connection implants: Results after 4 years of functional loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 254-61
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Novaes Jr AB, de Oliveira RR, Muglia VA, Papalexiou V, Taba M. The effects of interimplant distances on papilla formation and crestal resorption in implants with a Morse cone connection and a platform switch: A histomorphometric study in dogs. J Periodontol 2006; 77: 1839-49
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Pontes AE, Ribeiro FS, da Silva VC, Margonar R, Piattelli A, Cirelli JA. et al. Clinical and radiographic changes around dental implants inserted in different levels in relation to the crestal bone, under different restoration protocols, in the dog model. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 486-94
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Brägger U, Karoussis I, Persson R, Pjetursson B, Salvi G, Lang N. Technical and biological complications/failures with single crowns and fixed partial dentures on implants: A 10-year prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16: 326-34
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T. Subcrestal placement of two-part implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 226-31
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Canullo L, Iurlaro G, Iannello G. Double-blind randomized controlled trial study on post-extraction immediately restored implants using the switching platform concept: Soft tissue response. Preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 414-20
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Covani U, Marconcini S, Crespi R, Barone A. Bacterial plaque colonization around dental implant surfaces. Implant Dent 2006; 15: 298-304
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Canullo L, Fedele GR, Iannello G, Jepsen S. Platform switching and marginal bone-level alterations: The results of a randomized-controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 115-21
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Canullo L, Pellegrini G, Allievi C, Trombelli L, Annibali S, Dellavia C. Soft tissues around long-term platform switching implant restorations: A histological human evaluation. Preliminary results. J Clin Periodontol 2011; 38: 86-94
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Cappiello M, Luongo R, Di Iorio D, Bugea C, Cocchetto R, Celletti R. Evaluation of peri-implant bone loss around platform-switched implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008; 28: 347-55
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Lazzara RJ, Porter SS. Platform switching: A new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26: 9-17
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Canullo L, Rasperini G. Preservation of peri-implant soft and hard tissues using platform switching of implants placed in immediate extraction sockets: A proof-of-concept study with 12- to 36-month follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 995-1000
  Google Scholar
• 41 Luongo R, Traini T, Guidone PC, Bianco G, Cocchetto R, Celletti R. Hard and soft tissue responses to the platform-switching technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008; 28: 551-7
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Farronato D, Santoro G, Canullo L, Botticelli D, Maiorana C, Lang NP. Establishment of the epithelial attachment and connective tissue adaptation to implants installed under the concept of “platform switching”: A histologic study in minipigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 90-4
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Oh TJ, Yoon J, Misch CE, Wang HL. The causes of early implant bone loss: Myth or science?. J Periodontol 2002; 73: 322-33
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Wennström J, Lindhe J. The peri-implant hard and soft tissues at different implant systems. A comparative study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996; 7: 212-9
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Hermann JS, Cochran DL, Nummikoski PV, Buser D. Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A radiographic evaluation of unloaded nonsubmerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 1117-30
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Hürzeler M, Fickl S, Zuhr O, Wachtel HC. Peri-implant bone level around implants with platform-switched abutments: Preliminary data from a prospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65: 33-9
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: A review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986; 1: 11-25
  Google Scholar
• 48 Hagiwara Y. Does platform switching really prevent crestal bone loss around implants?. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 2010; 46: 122-31
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 49 Chou CT, Morris HF, Ochi S, Walker L, DesRosiers D. AICRG, part II: Crestal bone loss associated with the Ankylos implant: Loading to 36 months. J Oral Implantol 2004; 30: 134-43
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 50 Derks J, Tomasi C. Peri-implant health and disease. A systematic review of current epidemiology. J Clin Periodontol 2015; 42: S158-71
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 51 Atieh MA, Ibrahim HM, Atieh AH. Platform switching for marginal bone preservation around dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2010; Oct 81 (10) 1350-66
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 52 Annibali S, Bignozzi I, Cristalli MP, Graziani F, La Monaca G, Polimeni A. Peri-implant marginal bone level: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing platform switching versus conventionally restored implants. J Clin Periodontol 2012; Nov 39 (11) 1097-113
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 53 Papalexiou V, Novaes Jr AB, Ribeiro RF, Muglia V, Oliveira RR. Influence of the interimplant distance on crestal bone resorption and bone density: A histomorphometric study in dogs. J Periodontol 2006; 77: 614-21
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 54 Tarnow DP, Magner AW, Fletcher P. The effect of the distance from the contact point to the crest of bone on the presence or absence of the interproximal dental papilla. J Periodontol 1992; 63: 995-6
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 55 Scarano A, Assenza B, Piattelli M, Thams U, San Roman F, Favero GA. et al. Interimplant distance and crestal bone resorption: A histologic study in the canine mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2004; 6: 150-6
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 56 Novaes Jr AB, Barros RR, Muglia VA, Borges GJ. Influence of interimplant distances and placement depth on papilla formation and crestal resorption: A clinical and radiographic study in dogs. J Oral Implantol 2009; 35: 18-27
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 57 de Oliveira RR, Novaes Jr AB, Papalexiou V, Muglia VA, Taba Jr M. Influence of interimplant distance on papilla formation and bone resorption: A clinical-radiographic study in dogs. J Oral Implantol 2006; 32: 218-27
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 58 Degidi M, Nardi D, Piattelli A. One abutment at one time: Non-removal of an immediate abutment and its effect on bone healing around subcrestal tapered implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 1303-7
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 59 Choi KS, Lozada JL, Kan JY, Lee SH, Kim CS, Kwon TG. Study of an experimental microthreaded scalloped implant design: Proximal bone healing at different interimplant distances in a canine model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 681-9
  Google Scholar
• 60 Gargiulo AW, Wentz FM, Orban B. Dimension and relations of the dentogingival junction in humans. J Periodontol 1961; 32: 261-7
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 61 Vacek JS, Gher ME, Assad DA, Richardson AC, Giambarresi LI. The dimensions of the human dentogingival junction. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994; 14: 154-65
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 62 Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Ericsson I, Marinello CP, Liljenberg B, Thomsen P. The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991; 2: 81-90
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 63 Gastaldo JF, Cury PR, Sendyk WR. Effect of the vertical and horizontal distances between adjacent implants and between a tooth and an implant on the incidence of interproximal papilla. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 1242-6
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 64 Belser U, Buser D, Higginbottom F. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding esthetics in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19 Suppl 73-4
  Google Scholar
• 65 Cochran DL, Hermann JS, Schenk RK, Higginbottom FL, Buser D. Biologic width around titanium implants. A histometric analysis of the implanto-gingival junction around unloaded and loaded nonsubmerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 186-98
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 66 Tarnow D, Stahl SS, Magner A, Zamzok J. Human gingival attachment responses to subgingival crown placement. Marginal remodelling. J Clin Periodontol 1986; 13: 563-9
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 67 Tarnow D, Elian N, Fletcher P, Froum S, Magner A, Cho SC. et al. Vertical distance from the crest of bone to the height of the interproximal papilla between adjacent implants. J Periodontol 2003; 74: 1785-8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 68 Maeda Y, Miura J, Taki I, Sogo M. Biomechanical analysis on platform switching: Is there any biomechanical rationale?. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 581-4
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 69 Kitagawa T, Tanimoto Y, Odaki M, Nemoto K, Aida M. Influence of implant/abutment joint designs on abutment screw loosening in a dental implant system. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005; 75: 457-63
  Google Scholar
• 70 Chun HJ, Shin HS, Han CH, Lee SH. Influence of implant abutment type on stress distribution in bone under various loading conditions using finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 195-202
  Google Scholar
• 71 Oshida Y, Tuna EB, Aktören O, Gençay K. Dental implant systems. Int J Mol Sci 2010; 11: 1580-678
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 72 Perriard J, Wiskott WA, Mellal A, Scherrer SS, Botsis J, Belser UC. Fatigue resistance of ITI implant-abutment connectors – A comparison of the standard cone with a novel internally keyed design. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13: 542-9
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 73 Steinmann SG, Winter GD, Leray JL, de Groot K. editors. In Evaluation of Biomaterials. New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons; 1980: 1-34
  Google Scholar
• 74 Dedigi M, Novaes AB, Nardi D, Piattelli A. Immediately loaded titanium implant with a tissue-stabilizing/maintaining design (beyond platform switch) retrieved from man after 4 weeks: A histological and histomorphometrical evaluation. A case report. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 276-82
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 75 Krebs M, Schmenger K, Neumann K, Weigl P, Moser W, Nentwig GH. Long-term evaluation of Ankylos® dental implants, part I: 20-year life table analysis of a longitudinal study of more than 12,500 implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17: 2-12
  Google Scholar
• 76 Bozkaya D, Müftü S. Mechanics of the tapered interference fit in dental implants. J Biomech 2003; 36: 1649-58
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 77 Morris HF, Ochi S, Crum P, Orenstein IH, Winkler S. AICRG, part I: A 6-year multicentered, multidisciplinary clinical study of a new and innovative implant design. J Oral Implantol 2004; 30: 125-33
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 78 Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002; 29 (Suppl. 03) 197-212
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 79 Gracis S, Michalakis K, Vigolo P, Vult von SteyenP, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Internal vs external connections for abutments/reconstructions: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants 2012; 23: 202-16
  Google Scholar
• 80 Brägger U, Aeschlimann S, Bürgin W, Hämmerle CH, Lang NP. Biological and technical complications and failures with fixed partial dentures (FPD) on implants and teeth after four to five years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 26-34
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 81 Chapman RJ, Grippo W. The locking taper attachment for implant abutments: Use and reliability. Implant Dent 1996; 5: 257-61
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 82 Garber DA, Salama MA, Salama H. Immediate total tooth replacement. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2001; 22: 210-6 218
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 83 Sutter F, Weber H, Sorensen J. The new restorative concept of the ITI dental implant system: Design and engineering. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1993; 13: 409-31
  Google Scholar
• 84 Weigl P. New prosthetic restorative features of the Ankylos implant system. J Implantol 2004; 30: 178-88
  Google Scholar