Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 24, 2026
Dynamic Navigation for Dental Implant Placement
Published on: September 13, 2022
Clinical and Radiographic Comparison between Platform-Shifted and Nonplatform-Shifted Implant: A One-Year Prospective
Maarten Glibert1, Stijn Vervaeke1, Hugo De Bruyn1,2
1Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
Background:
Developments in implant hardware and biologic understanding improved treatment predictability in terms of implant survival. Current research focuses on accelerated loading protocols and crestal bone preservation.
Purpose:
This prospective, monocenter study analyzed the clinical and radiographic outcome of a novel parallel-walled implant, with and without platform shift.
Materials And Methods:
Forty-eight consecutively treated patients (30 women, 18 men) with crowns/bridges supported by 115 implants were included. Eighty-three percent of implants were nonocclusal, immediately loaded, and 17% were subjected to one-stage surgery and delayed loading after 10 weeks; 39.1% were of diameter 5.0 mm, enabling platform shifting with a 4.0 mm-wide prosthetic component; 60.9% were of diameter 4.0 mm with a 4.0 mm component. Radiographic crestal bone levels were assessed at baseline and 1 year. A multivariate statistical analysis was performed to determine factors affecting crestal bone loss after 1 year.
Results:
All implants survived and mean marginal bone loss was 0.73 mm (SD: 0.13; range: -0.60 to 5.0 mm). There was a statistically significant difference between platform-shifted (0.63 mm; SD: 0.18) and nonplatform-shifted (1.02 mm; SD: 0.14) implants. Implants in abundant bone volume lost significant less crestal bone (0.45 mm; SD: 0.14) compared with implants in small volume (1.20 mm; SD: 0.21). Implant diameter, loading time, anatomical position, smoking, and bone quality did not affect crestal bone loss.
Conclusion:
After 1 year of loading, both implant-prosthetic features yield a high survival and limited crestal bone loss. Crestal bone loss is minimized using platform-shifted implants placed in sufficiently voluminous bone. To limit the crestal bone loss, an adopted implant diameter with platform shifting should be considered.
