Introduction: Hence we piloted a systemic review and meta analysis to calculate the rate of survival, response of the tissue, and satisfaction of the patient for the different attachments in the overdentures. Materials and Methods: We conducted the search for the data from the online sources like the “EMBASE”, “Pubmed”, “Scopus” and other sources. The articles for the past 20 years were searched for the parameters attachment’s of the survival, soft /hard tissues reactions, attachment’s restoration and care, and general performance of the attachments in the overdenture. The data extraction and meta-analysis were based on the PRISMA guidelines. For the assessment of the risk factors and the variables the statistical analysis was done keeping p<0.05 as significant. Result: There were only 16 articles that fit into the study after the application of the inclusions and the exclusion criteria applied. We observed that most of the studies were with the comparison of the combinations of the attachments like bar and ball attachments and their subtypes, magnetic and bar attachments, and locator in combination with other attachments. The meta-analysis of pooled 16 studies stated acceptable heterogeneity among 16 studies (I 2 = 96%) and testified to be statistically significant (P < 0.01). Conclusion: We can conclude that the rate of survival in the attachments for a mean followup of three years, ranged from 96.2%–100% for ball, 95.8%–97.5% for bar, 90%–92% for magnet and locator attachments were in the range of 97%. Various periodontal issues were reported for all the attachments. However, of all the types of attachments the ball and locator attachments was found to be good at survival rate, tissue response, and patient satisfaction.