Premium
Tissue Reactions to Abutment Shift: An Experimental Study in Dogs
Author(s) -
Abrahamsson Ingemar,
Berglundh Tord,
Sekino Satoshi,
Lindhe Jan
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00188.x
Subject(s) - abutment , dentistry , premolar , medicine , dental abutments , connective tissue , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , orthodontics , implant , molar , surgery , engineering , biology , civil engineering , botany , pathology , genus
Background : Standard protocols for the clinical use of dental implants often include the placement of healing abutments prior to standard or custom‐made abutments. The tissue response to a single shift from a healing abutment to a permanent abutment has not been studied. Purpose : The aim of the present experiment was to study tissue reactions that may occur following the removal of a healing abutment and the placement of a permanent abutment. Materials and Methods : In six beagle dogs, all mandibular premolars were extracted. Three months later three fixtures of the Astra Tech Implants Dental System (Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) were installed in each edentulous premolar region. An additional 3 months later, the first abutment connection was performed. In two sites on each side of the mandible, healing abutments were placed; in the remaining site, a Uni‐abutment (Astra Tech AB) was used. The two healing abutments were removed 2 weeks later, and one Uni‐abutment and one prepable abutment were placed. A plaque‐control period was initiated, and 6 months later block biopsies were obtained. The biopsies were prepared for histometric and morphometric examination. Radiographs were obtained at fixture placement, 2 weeks after the first abutment connection, and 6 months later. Results : The length of the barrier epithelium, the height of the connective tissue attachment, and the level of the marginal bone did not differ between the three abutment groups. The major part of the radiographic bone loss during the experiment took place prior to or immediately after abutment connection; only small bone level alterations occurred during the subsequent 6‐month period. Conclusions : The shift from a healing abutment to a permanent abutment resulted in the establishment of a transmucosal attachment, the dimension and quality of which did not differ from those of the mucosal barrier formed to a permanent abutment placed during a second‐stage surgery.