Comparative Study by Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Peri-Implant Effect of Two Types of Platforms: Platform-Switching versus Conventional Platforms

Objective: The aim of the systematic review and meta-analysis carried out was to evaluate the effects of changing the prosthetic platform on peri-implant tissue after 1 year of prosthetic loading. Material and methods: In November 2020, an electronic search was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases with the aim of obtaining all the randomized clinical trials that had been published in the preceding 10 years comparing the effects on the peri-implant tissue of implants with a prosthetic platform change and implants with a conventional platform for at least 1 year after prosthetic loading. Randomized model meta-analyses of the selected studies were performed to compare the results of the two implant groups in terms of vertical maintenance of bone level and increased probing depth. Results: Nine studies were included, summing up a total of 475 implants with prosthetic platform exchange and 462 implants with a conventional platform. Implants with prosthetic platform exchange had less peri-implant bone loss than implants with a conventional platform (mean difference of 0.255 mm, statistically significant) but suffered a greater increase in probing depth (mean difference of 0.082 mm, not statistically significant). However, the probing depth from One Study Remove revealed a statistically significant increase of 0.190 mm in the prosthetic platform exchange group compared to the conventional platform group. Conclusion: Implants with platform switching suffer less peri-implant bone loss after 1 year of loading than implants with a conventional platform. Further long-term studies are required to observe how these differences vary over time.