Saulo Pamato1, Heitor Marques Honório2, Jorge Alexandre da Costa3, Jefferson Luiz Traebert1, Estevam Augusto Bonfante4, Jefferson Ricardo Pereira1. 1. Post-Graduate Program of Health Sciences, University of Southern Santa Catarina, Tubarão, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 2. Department of Pediatrics Dentistry, Orthodontics, and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru Campus, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Prosthodontics, University of Southern Santa Catarina, Tubarão, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 4. Department of Prosthodontics and Periodontology, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru Campus, São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some techniques in implant dentistry have been suggested that may potentially alter peri-implant soft and hard tissue parameters. PURPOSE: To evaluate the peri-implant soft tissue inflammatory parameters and crestal bone loss around titanium base abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Fifty two implants were placed in 21 patients and restored by single crowns. Subjects were randomly allocated into two groups: cement-retained abutment (n = 24) and titanium base (n = 28). Peri-implant probing depth, and mesial and distal marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated at implant loading (T1), 6 and 12 months (T2 and T3, respectively). Peri-implant bleeding-on-probing was evaluated at T2 and T3. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance, Tukey test, Man Whitney, and Pearson correlation were performed for statistical analysis at P < .05. RESULTS: The mean difference of peri-implant MBL from implant installation to 12 months in function was 1.15 ± 0.82 mm for the cement-retained group, and 1.23 ± 0.79 mm for the titanium base group. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups for clinical and radiographic peri-implant evaluation. CONCLUSIONS:Titanium base abutments present no negative effect on peri-implant soft tissue and MBL. When used to support single crowns, both approaches performed likewise regarding clinical and radiographic parameters.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Some techniques in implant dentistry have been suggested that may potentially alter peri-implant soft and hard tissue parameters. PURPOSE: To evaluate the peri-implant soft tissue inflammatory parameters and crestal bone loss around titanium base abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty two implants were placed in 21 patients and restored by single crowns. Subjects were randomly allocated into two groups: cement-retained abutment (n = 24) and titanium base (n = 28). Peri-implant probing depth, and mesial and distal marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated at implant loading (T1), 6 and 12 months (T2 and T3, respectively). Peri-implant bleeding-on-probing was evaluated at T2 and T3. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance, Tukey test, Man Whitney, and Pearson correlation were performed for statistical analysis at P < .05. RESULTS: The mean difference of peri-implant MBL from implant installation to 12 months in function was 1.15 ± 0.82 mm for the cement-retained group, and 1.23 ± 0.79 mm for the titanium base group. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups for clinical and radiographic peri-implant evaluation. CONCLUSIONS:Titanium base abutments present no negative effect on peri-implant soft tissue and MBL. When used to support single crowns, both approaches performed likewise regarding clinical and radiographic parameters.