Michael Weinländer1, Vojislav Lekovic1, Sanja Spadijer-Gostovic1, Bilijana Milicic1, Walther A Wegscheider1, Eva Piehslinger1. 1. Private Practice, Department of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics, Dental School Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, AustriaPeriodontal Clinic, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, SerbiaDepartment of Prosthodontics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, SerbiaDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School Graz, University of Graz, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate soft tissue development at concave circular macro-grooved titanium abutments in healed sites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a split-mouth pilot study 10 patients received two implants each at healed posterior sites in contralateral maxillary or mandibular jaw quadrants. Either circular macro-grooved concave study abutments or conventional convex control abutments were immediately provisionalized and received permanent crowns 3 months postimplantation. Marginal bone level, papilla index, modified plaque and bleeding index were recorded. The esthetic outcome was evaluated with standardized perpendicular pictures according to the Pink Esthetic Score (PES). Statistical analysis included the description of all variables by mean value, standard deviation and range. PES values were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test for paired data. RESULTS: Cumulative survival rate for all 20 implants was 100%. At the 1-year follow-up, there was no statistical significant difference of marginal bone levels between sites restored with the study (-0.11 ± 0.77 mm) vs. the control (-0.34 ± 0.53 mm) abutments (P>0.05). Esthetic evaluation (PES) revealed statistically significant differences in scores between the study group [study abutment group] (7.2 ± 2.82, 8 ± 1.89) and the control group [control abutment group] (9.5 ± 1.58, 10.5 ± 1.72) at the time of prosthetic delivery and the 1-year follow-up. Whereas PES scores for mesial papilla at control sites at the 1-year follow-up demonstrated statistically significant higher values, both soft tissue level and soft tissue contour at control sites revealed statistically significantly higher PES values (P<0.05) at time of prosthetic delivery and at 1-year follow-up when compared with study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Concave macro-grooved abutments in healed posterior maxillary and mandibular sites did not exhibit a superior soft tissue development compared with standard convex abutments.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate soft tissue development at concave circular macro-grooved titanium abutments in healed sites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a split-mouth pilot study 10 patients received two implants each at healed posterior sites in contralateral maxillary or mandibular jaw quadrants. Either circular macro-grooved concave study abutments or conventional convex control abutments were immediately provisionalized and received permanent crowns 3 months postimplantation. Marginal bone level, papilla index, modified plaque and bleeding index were recorded. The esthetic outcome was evaluated with standardized perpendicular pictures according to the Pink Esthetic Score (PES). Statistical analysis included the description of all variables by mean value, standard deviation and range. PES values were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test for paired data. RESULTS: Cumulative survival rate for all 20 implants was 100%. At the 1-year follow-up, there was no statistical significant difference of marginal bone levels between sites restored with the study (-0.11 ± 0.77 mm) vs. the control (-0.34 ± 0.53 mm) abutments (P>0.05). Esthetic evaluation (PES) revealed statistically significant differences in scores between the study group [study abutment group] (7.2 ± 2.82, 8 ± 1.89) and the control group [control abutment group] (9.5 ± 1.58, 10.5 ± 1.72) at the time of prosthetic delivery and the 1-year follow-up. Whereas PES scores for mesial papilla at control sites at the 1-year follow-up demonstrated statistically significant higher values, both soft tissue level and soft tissue contour at control sites revealed statistically significantly higher PES values (P<0.05) at time of prosthetic delivery and at 1-year follow-up when compared with study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Concave macro-grooved abutments in healed posterior maxillary and mandibular sites did not exhibit a superior soft tissue development compared with standard convex abutments.
Authors: Alexander Fügl; Werner Zechner; Alessandro Pozzi; Guido Heydecke; Christine Mirzakhanian; Nikolaus Behneke; Alexandra Behneke; Russell A Baer; Robert Nölken; Edward Gottesman; Snjezana Colic Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-11-18 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Saverio Cosola; Simone Marconcini; Michela Boccuzzi; Giovanni Battista Menchini Fabris; Ugo Covani; Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago; David Peñarrocha-Oltra Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-22 Impact factor: 3.390