The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess marginal bone changes around implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles. Patients were treated with implants supporting fixed dentures and were followed for 3 years. Marginal bone levels (MBL) measured at the prosthesis installation (t0) and at the 3-year follow-up visit (t1) were considered. The MBL change from t0 to t1 was investigated. Two groups were considered: Group 1 for restorations with an angle between implant axis and prosthetic emergence profile >30°, and Group 2 for those with an angle ≤30°, respectively. Moreover, peri-implant soft tissue parameters, such as the modified bleeding index (MBI) and plaque index (PI) were assessed. Seventy-four patients were included in the analysis and a total of 312 implants were examined. The mean EA in groups 1 and 2 was 45 ± 4 and 22 ± 7 degrees, respectively. The mean marginal bone level change (MBL change) of 0.06 ± 0.09 mm and 0.06 ± 0.10 mm were, respectively, in groups 1 and 2. The difference in the MBL change between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.969). The MBL change does not seem to be influenced by the emergence angle for implants with a stable internal conical connection and platform-switching of the abutment diameter.
Background: The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess peri-implant soft tissue health for implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles. Methods: Patients were treated with implants supporting fixed dentures and were followed for 3 years. Buccal emergence angle (EA) measured at 3 years of follow-up visits (t1) were calculated for two different groups: Group 1 (153 implants) for restorations with angle between implant axis and prosthetic emergence angle from ≥30°, and Group 2 (67 implants) for those with angle ≤30°, respectively. Image J software was used for the measurements. Moreover, peri-implant soft tissue parameters such as pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) were assessed, respectively. Results: A total of 57 patients were included in the analysis and a total of 220 implants were examined. Mean (±SD) EA in Groups 1 and 2 was 46.4 ± 12.2 and 24.5 ± 4.7 degrees, respectively. After 3 years of follow-up, a PPD difference of 0.062 mm (CI95% −0.041 mm; 0.164 mm) was calculated between the two groups and was not statistically significant (p = 0.238). Similar results were found for PI (OR = 0.78, CI95% 0.31; 1.98, p = 0.599). Furthermore, GI scores of 2 and 3 were found for nine implants (5.9%) in Group 1, and for five implants in Group 2 (7.5%). A non-significant difference (p = 0.76) was found. Conclusions: Peri-implant soft-tissue health does not seem to be influenced by EA itself, when a proper emergence profile is provided for implant-supported reconstructions in anterior areas.
Background: There is limited information on the effect of the connection between subcrestally placed implants and abutments on marginal bone levels. The aim of the present retrospective study was to evaluate marginal bone levels after definitive prosthesis delivery around implants with an internal 5° conical connection placed in a subcrestal position. Materials and methods: Patients treated with fixed prostheses supported by implants placed at a subcrestal level between 2012 and 2018 were recalled for a follow-up examination. All implants had 5° internal conical connection with platform switching. Radiographic marginal bone level (MBL) was measured. MBL change between prosthetic delivery (t0) and follow-up examination (t1) was calculated. A multiple regression model was performed to identify the most significant predictors on MBL change. Results: Ninety-three patients and 410 implants, with a mean follow-up of 2.72 ± 1.31 years, were examined. Mean MBL was −1.09 ± 0.65 mm and −1.00 ± 0.37 mm at t0 and t1, respectively, with a mean bone remodeling of 0.09 ± 0.68 mm. An implant’s vertical position in relation to the bone crest, the year of follow up and the presence of type-2 controlled diabetes were demonstrated to be influencing factors for MBL modifications. Conclusions: Subcrestally placed implants with platform switching and internal conical connection maintained stable bone levels over a mean follow-up of more than 2 years. How a tight internal conical connection between abutment and implant may contribute to this clinical evidence should be more deeply investigated. MBL variations seem to be mostly influenced by an implant’s vertical position and presence of type-2 controlled diabetes.
The main aim of this case series was to report the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 22 one-piece zirconia dental implants positioned in 19 patients to restore single edentulisms and followed up for at least 2 years. The mean observation period was 58.18 months. At the last follow-up visit, no issues, such as foreign body sensation, discomfort or pain, were reported by the patients. No implant showed signs of infection with suppuration or implant mobility. Marginal bone levels (MBL) were assessed through standardized dental radiographs and a dedicated software. The mean distance between the implant head and the first detectable bone to implant contact was calculated at the mesial and distal aspect of each implant. The mean MBL at baseline was 1.82 ± 0.63 mm while the mean MBL at the last follow-up visit was 2.57 ± 0.72 mm. The results obtained in the present case series over a mean follow-up period of 58.18 months (range 27–96) showed that one-piece zirconia dental implants could be an alternative option to support single crowns in patients requiring metal-free restorations. Nevertheless, further better-controlled research featuring an adequate study design and longer follow-up is needed in order to clarify advantages and limitations which are related to this treatment modality.
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing customized abutments are increasingly used in everyday clinical practice. Nevertheless, solid scientific evidence is currently lacking regarding their potential advantages in terms of soft tissue stability. The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the soft tissue outcomes of prefabricated versus customized (CAD/CAM) abutments. The present review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020161875) and the protocol was developed according to the PRISMA statement. An electronic search was performed on three databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central) up to May 2023. Data extraction was followed by qualitative and quantitative analysis of the included studies. Three randomized controlled clinical trials and three controlled clinical trials (number of patients = 230; number of dental implants = 230) with a follow-up of between 12 and 36 months were included. No significant differences were observed between prefabricated versus customized (CAD/CAM) abutments regarding midfacial mucosal recession, interproximal papillae and pink aesthetic score (PES) after 12 months. Conclusion: The potential benefits of CAD/CAM abutments on soft tissues should be better clarified in future investigations. The usage of customized CAD/CAM abutments in everyday clinical practice should be based on a careful case-by-case evaluation (CRD42020161875).
The aim of the present investigation is to evaluate the implant therapy outcomes over a period of 5 years and to analyze several patient risk factors influencing the stability of the peri-implant tissues. Seventy-eight patients were consecutively treated between 2009 and 2017 and restored with implant-supported fixed prostheses. The following inclusion criteria were considered: partial or complete edentulism; residual bone volume of at least 3.3 mm in diameter and 8 mm in length; a favorable relationship between maxilla and mandible; at least a minimum 5 year follow-up for each implant included in the statistical analysis. Intraoral radiographs were taken at implant loading and every 12 months during the follow-up visits. They were subsequently stored on a personal computer and analyzed to determine the changes in bone level. Seventy-eight patients receiving 209 implants completed a minimum follow-up period of 5 years. One-hundred dental implants were inserted in the maxilla while 109 were placed in the mandible. Eleven (14.1%) out of 78 treated patients who received 29 (13.9%) dental implants were considered as drop-outs. On the whole, peri-implantitis was diagnosed in three implants. The average final pocket probing depth at implant level was 2.5 ± 1.2 mm. The average final bone loss after 5 years was 0.3 ± 0.4 mm, both at the mesial and distal aspect of the implant. The effects of the prosthesis type, sex and implant site did not statistically influence the marginal bone loss; on the contrary, a statistically significant difference regarding marginal bone loss was detected between smoker and non-smoker patients (p = 0.021). Implants with internal-conical abutment connection showed stable peri-implant bone levels at the medium-term follow-up. Nevertheless, further prospective long-term clinical studies are necessary to confirm these data.