Premium
Papillary fill response in single‐tooth implants using abutments of different geometry
Author(s) -
Patil Ratnadeep,
Hartog Laurens,
Dilbaghi Anjali,
Jong Bart,
Kerdijk Wouter,
Cune Marco S.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.12594
Subject(s) - major duodenal papilla , dentistry , abutment , implant , medicine , orthodontics , significant difference , crown (dentistry) , anatomy , surgery , civil engineering , engineering
Objective To evaluate the influence of abutment geometry on papillary fill in the esthetic zone in a delayed crown protocol. Materials and methods Twenty‐six subjects received two non‐adjacent endosseous implants in the esthetic zone. Functional temporary crowns were installed 17–19 weeks later, using conventional (control) and curved (experimental) abutments. The abutments were randomized in each patient independently. Final crowns were cemented after 2 months ( T 0). Standard intraoral photographs and radiographs were made to evaluate papillary fill after 12 months ( T 12). The interproximal papilla fill was measured by means of the papilla index score ( PIS ) and related to the maximum bone level between the implant and the adjacent root as well as the peri‐implant marginal bone level at T 12, both measured radiographically. Results No statistically significant difference between the experimental and the control group could be demonstrated ( P = 0.25). Ordinal regression analysis showed a positive correlation between the maximum bone level and papilla fill ( P < 0.01) and a negative correlation between the peri‐implant marginal bone level and papilla fill ( P < 0.05). Conclusion A concave abutment does not exhibit a better fill of the papilla compared with a straight abutment in single‐tooth implant placement using a delayed protocol in the esthetic zone after 12 months of function.