Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: A systematic review

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>In this systematic review, we aimed to compare conical versus nonconical implant–abutment connection systems in terms of their <jats:italic>in vitro</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>in vivo</jats:italic> performances. An electronic search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases with the logical operators: “dental implant” AND “dental abutment” AND (“conical” OR “taper” OR “cone”). Names of the most common conical implant–abutment connection systems were used as additional key words to detect further data. The search was limited to articles published up to November 2012. Recent publications were also searched manually in order to find any relevant studies that might have been missed using the search criteria noted above. Fifty‐two studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. As the data and methods, as well as types of implants used was so heterogeneous, this mitigated against the performance of meta‐analysis. <jats:italic>In vitro</jats:italic> studies indicated that conical and nonconical abutments showed sufficient resistance to maximal bending forces and fatigue loading. However, conical abutments showed superiority in terms of seal performance, microgap formation, torque maintenance, and abutment stability. <jats:italic>In vivo</jats:italic> studies (human and animal) indicated that conical and nonconical systems are comparable in terms of implant success and survival rates with less marginal bone loss around conical connection implants in most cases. This review indicates that implant systems using a conical implant–abutment connection, provides better results in terms of abutment fit, stability, and seal performance. These design features could lead to improvements over time versus nonconical connection systems. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 102A: 552–574, 2014.</jats:p>