Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 7, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Influence of Abutment Shape on Implant Marginal Bone Remodeling: A Double-Blind, Randomized 24-Month Clinical Study
Flavio Seijas Naya1, Juan C Bernabeu Mira2, Alba Pérez Jardón1,3
1Oral Medicine, Oral Surgery and Implantology Unit (MedOralRes), Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Objective:
This study follows a 2-year evaluation to verify marginal bone remodeling (MBR) trends associated with different abutment designs.
Methods:
A balanced, randomised, double-blind clinical trial with two parallel experimental arms. 68 implants were placed in 9 men and 12 women, 48.5% using the straight abutment and 51.5% the concave abutment. The primary variable was peri-implant tissue stability, measured by marginal bone loss (MBL) or gain (MBG) through digital radiology. Mixed linear regression models and Additive Generalized Additive Models were constructed to estimate MBR, simultaneously considering the variables abutment height, group, and time.
Results:
At 24 months, linear mixed-effects regression models revealed that the concave abutment group exhibited significantly less MBL than the straight abutment group across mesial, distal, and average measurements (p = 0.006-0.026). Significant interactions between abutment type and time at 8 weeks and 6 months suggest early and sustained benefits of the concave design. At 24 months, this effect remained significant except in the mesial model (p = 0.072). Abutment height was positively associated with MBL, particularly in the straight group; however, in the concave group, greater height mitigated bone loss (p < 0.01).
Conclusion:
Concave abutments demonstrated a potential advantage in reducing early marginal bone loss and promoting mid-term bone stability compared to straight abutments. Their design may enhance soft tissue adaptation, contributing to improved peri-implant bone preservation. While increased abutment height showed a protective effect in the concave group, these findings require confirmation. Further long-term studies are warranted to validate these results and clarify their clinical relevance.

