Leticia Sala1,2, Antonio Bascones-Martínez3,4, Ana Carrillo-de-Albornoz3,4. 1. Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. letisala@hotmail.com. 2. Departmento de Estomatología III, Facultad de Odontología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal S/N, 28040, Madrid, Spain. letisala@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 4. Departmento de Estomatología III, Facultad de Odontología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal S/N, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present study is to determine the differences in peri-implant soft tissue color with the utilization of titanium, titanium gold-plated, white zirconia, Vita Classical (VC) A4-shaded zirconia, and fluorescent white zirconia abutments and to establish the influence of gingival thickness on the resulting color. METHODS: Four implants were contralaterally inserted in 19 fresh pig mandibles, and the color of the peri-implant mucosa with the different abutments was spectrophotometrically measured at 1-, 2-, and 3-mm height from the margin. RESULTS: At 1-mm height, titanium significantly differed from all zirconia abutments in lightness (L*), chroma along red axis (a*), and chroma along yellow-blue axis (b*) parameters. At 2 mm, all zirconia abutments differed from titanium in b* but only fluorescent zirconia in a*. At 3 mm, titanium differed from VC A4-shaded and fluorescent zirconia abutments in b*. At soft tissue thicknesses <1 and 1-2 mm, titanium differed from fluorescent zirconia in a* and b* and from VC A4-shaded zirconia in b*; at thickness >2 mm, no differences were found among abutments. All abutments differed from natural teeth in a* and b* at all heights and thicknesses except for fluorescent zirconia at thickness >2 mm. The Euclidean distance (ΔΕ) differed between titanium abutments and gold, VC A4, and fluorescent zirconia at <1- and 1-2-mm thicknesses. CONCLUSION: The natural gingival color was not reproduced with any abutment at gingival thicknesses <2 mm. The worst color match was with titanium abutments and the best with fluorescent zirconia, followed by VC A4-shaded zirconia. At gingival thicknesses >2 mm, no differences were detected among abutments. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates that the type of abutment and the gingival thickness affect the resulting peri-implant gingival color.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present study is to determine the differences in peri-implant soft tissue color with the utilization of titanium, titanium gold-plated, white zirconia, Vita Classical (VC) A4-shaded zirconia, and fluorescent white zirconia abutments and to establish the influence of gingival thickness on the resulting color. METHODS: Four implants were contralaterally inserted in 19 fresh pig mandibles, and the color of the peri-implant mucosa with the different abutments was spectrophotometrically measured at 1-, 2-, and 3-mm height from the margin. RESULTS: At 1-mm height, titanium significantly differed from all zirconia abutments in lightness (L*), chroma along red axis (a*), and chroma along yellow-blue axis (b*) parameters. At 2 mm, all zirconia abutments differed from titanium in b* but only fluorescent zirconia in a*. At 3 mm, titanium differed from VC A4-shaded and fluorescent zirconia abutments in b*. At soft tissue thicknesses <1 and 1-2 mm, titanium differed from fluorescent zirconia in a* and b* and from VC A4-shaded zirconia in b*; at thickness >2 mm, no differences were found among abutments. All abutments differed from natural teeth in a* and b* at all heights and thicknesses except for fluorescent zirconia at thickness >2 mm. The Euclidean distance (ΔΕ) differed between titanium abutments and gold, VC A4, and fluorescent zirconia at <1- and 1-2-mm thicknesses. CONCLUSION: The natural gingival color was not reproduced with any abutment at gingival thicknesses <2 mm. The worst color match was with titanium abutments and the best with fluorescent zirconia, followed by VC A4-shaded zirconia. At gingival thicknesses >2 mm, no differences were detected among abutments. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates that the type of abutment and the gingival thickness affect the resulting peri-implant gingival color.
Authors: Alberto Sicilia; Marc Quirynen; Alain Fontolliet; Helena Francisco; Anton Friedman; Tomas Linkevicius; Rainer Lutz; Henny J Meijer; Eric Rompen; Roberto Rotundo; Frank Schwarz; Massimo Simion; Wim Teughels; Ann Wennerberg; Otto Zuhr Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Ronald E Jung; Claudia Holderegger; Irena Sailer; Ameen Khraisat; Ana Suter; Christoph H F Hämmerle Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Ralph van Brakel; Herke Jan Noordmans; Joost Frenken; Rowland de Roode; Gerard C de Wit; Marco S Cune Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Ronald E Jung; Irena Sailer; Christoph H F Hämmerle; Thomas Attin; Patrick Schmidlin Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: B Andersson; A Taylor; B R Lang; H Scheller; P Schärer; J A Sorensen; D Tarnow Journal: Int J Prosthodont Date: 2001 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.681
Authors: Peter Gehrke; Philip Hartjen; Ralf Smeets; Martin Gosau; Ulrike Peters; Thomas Beikler; Carsten Fischer; Carolin Stolzer; Jürgen Geis-Gerstorfer; Paul Weigl; Sogand Schäfer Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-01-17 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Vygandas Rutkunas; Rokas Borusevicius; Evaldas Balciunas; Urte Jasinskyte; Milda Alksne; Egidijus Simoliunas; Stefan Zlatev; Vasilena Ivanova; Virginija Bukelskiene; Eitan Mijiritsky Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-05 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Ronald E Jung; Kathrin Becker; Stefan P Bienz; Christer Dahlin; Nikos Donos; Christian Hammächer; Gerhard Iglhaut; Antonio Liñares; Alberto Ortiz-Vigón; Nerea Sanchez; Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez; Daniel S Thoma; Cristina Valles; Dietmar Weng; José Nart Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 5.021