PURPOSE: To compare the optical effects of an immediately placed anodized pink-neck implant and abutment vs a conventional gray implant and abutment in relation to soft tissue thickness 6 months after the restoration was completed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty patients with a hopeless maxillary anterior tooth received an immediate implant and an immediate provisional or custom healing abutment after flapless extraction. Participants were randomized to receive either a conventional titanium implant (control) or a pink-neck implant (test). All patients then received two identical CAD/CAM titanium abutments (one conventional gray, delivered first, and one anodized to appear pink, delivered 3 weeks after) and a zirconia crown. A spectrophotometer was used to record the color of the peri-implant mucosa and gingiva 3 weeks after delivery of each abutment and 6 months after the final restoration was delivered. The color difference between the two sites was calculated (ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*), and correlations with soft tissue thickness, change in ridge dimension, and implant position were assessed. RESULTS: Irrespective of the randomization group, changing the abutments from gray to pink showed a change in color between the peri-implant mucosa and the natural gingiva. Patients with a thin gingival biotype showed a statistically significant color change (P = .00089) in the a* axis, meaning that the gingiva appeared more pink (Δa*). No significant correlation between the soft tissue color and buccolingual collapse, vertical recession, or implant position was observed in either group. CONCLUSION: The difference in color observed between the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva was considerable in all groups. Anodized pink implants and abutments could reduce the difference in the red aspect (Δa*) of the peri-implant mucosa compared to the adjacent gingiva in patients with a thin biotype.
PURPOSE: To compare the optical effects of an immediately placed anodized pink-neck implant and abutment vs a conventional gray implant and abutment in relation to soft tissue thickness 6 months after the restoration was completed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty patients with a hopeless maxillary anterior tooth received an immediate implant and an immediate provisional or custom healing abutment after flapless extraction. Participants were randomized to receive either a conventional titanium implant (control) or a pink-neck implant (test). All patients then received two identical CAD/CAM titanium abutments (one conventional gray, delivered first, and one anodized to appear pink, delivered 3 weeks after) and a zirconia crown. A spectrophotometer was used to record the color of the peri-implant mucosa and gingiva 3 weeks after delivery of each abutment and 6 months after the final restoration was delivered. The color difference between the two sites was calculated (ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*), and correlations with soft tissue thickness, change in ridge dimension, and implant position were assessed. RESULTS: Irrespective of the randomization group, changing the abutments from gray to pink showed a change in color between the peri-implant mucosa and the natural gingiva. Patients with a thin gingival biotype showed a statistically significant color change (P = .00089) in the a* axis, meaning that the gingiva appeared more pink (Δa*). No significant correlation between the soft tissue color and buccolingual collapse, vertical recession, or implant position was observed in either group. CONCLUSION: The difference in color observed between the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva was considerable in all groups. Anodized pink implants and abutments could reduce the difference in the red aspect (Δa*) of the peri-implant mucosa compared to the adjacent gingiva in patients with a thin biotype.