Objective: The aim of this review was to investigate the evidence correlating the emergence profile (EP) and emergence angle (EA), peri‐implant tissue height, implant neck design, abutment and/or prosthesis material, retention and connection types with risk of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis.Methods: Seven focus questions were identified, and seven electronic search queries were conducted in PubMed. Human studies reporting on bleeding on probing, probing depth or case definitions of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis were included.Results: Emerging evidence with bone‐level implants suggests a link between EA combined with convex EP and peri‐implantitis. Depth of the peri‐implant sulcus of ≥3 mm is shown to be reducing the effectiveness of treatment of established peri‐implant mucositis. Modification of the prosthesis contour is shown to be an effective supplement of the anti‐infective treatment of peri‐implant mucositis. Limited evidence points to no difference with regard to the risk for peri‐implant mucositis between tissue‐ and bone‐level implants, as well as the material of the abutment or the prosthesis. Limited evidence suggests the use or not of prosthetic abutments in external connections and does not change the risk for peri‐implantitis. Literature with regard to prosthesis retention type and risk for peri‐implantitis is inconclusive.Conclusions: Limited evidence indicates the involvement of EA, EP, sulcus depth and restricted accessibility to oral hygiene in the manifestation and/or management of peri‐implant mucositis/peri‐implantitis. Conclusions are limited by the lack of consensus definitions and validated outcomes measures, as well as diverse methodological approaches. Purpose‐designed studies are required to clarify current observations.