Platform switch versus platform match in the posterior mandible – 1‐year results of a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Abstract

ObjectiveThe purpose of this ongoing randomized study was to assess differences in bone level changes and success rates using implants supporting single crowns in the posterior mandible either with platform matched or platform switched abutments.Material and MethodsPatients aged 18 and above, missing at least two teeth in the posterior mandible and with a natural tooth mesial to the most proximal implant site were enrolled. Randomization followed implant placement. Definitive restorations were placed after a minimum transgingival healing period of 8 weeks. Changes in crestal bone level from surgery and loading (baseline) to 12-month post-loading were radiographically measured. Implant survival and success were determined.ResultsSixty-eight patients received 74 implants in the platform switching group and 72 in the other one. The difference of mean marginal bone level change from surgery to 12 months was significant between groups (p < 0.004). Radiographical mean bone gain or no bone loss from loading was noted for 67.1% of the platform switching and 49.2% of the platform matching implants. Implant success rates were 97.3% and 100%, respectively.ConclusionsWithin the same implant system the platform switching concept showed a positive effect on marginal bone levels when compared with restorations with platform matching.

Peri‐implant tissue healing at implants with different designs and placement protocols: An experimental study in dogs

“…The finding that the marginal bone level is better preserved during healing after implant placement at implants with a PS implant/abutment connection than at implants with a PM connection is in agreement with previous animal and human studies (Baffone et al, ; Guerra et al, ; Rocha et al, ; Telleman et al, ; Weng, Nagata, Bosco, & Melo, ). Baffone et al () evaluated the effect of a mismatch between abutment and implant platform diameter in an experiment on six Labrador dogs.…”

“…The crestal bone level was identified in a significantly more coronal position at PS‐implants than at PM‐implants 3 months after implant placement. Guerra et al (), in a RCT used radiographs to assess crestal bone level changes during 12 months postloading at 74 single implants with a PS‐design and 72 implants with a PM‐design using implants from the CAMLOG system. They reported a small bone gain or no bone loss for 67.1% of the sites with PS implants as compared to 49.2% for the implants with PM design.…”

Effect of platform switching on crestal bone levels around implants in the posterior mandible: 3 years results from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

“…2014, Messias et al. 2013) before surgery, immediately after surgery with healing abutment, at restoration placement, and every 12 months post‐loading until the 60th month appointment (Fig.…”

Radiographic evaluation of conical tapered platform‐switched implants in the posterior mandible: 1‐year results of a two‐center prospective study

“…Recently, a prospective randomized‐controlled clinical multicenter trial reported positive results supporting the PS concept in commercially available implants with identical outer geometry and internal implant–abutment connection for both groups complied with the elimination of relevant confounders (Guerra et al. ). The present prospective observational study has been planned to evaluate the marginal bone level changes in implants with internal conical connection and platform switch design in the posterior mandible.…”