Association between Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Health and Different Prosthetic Emergence Angles in Esthetic Areas: Digital Evaluation after 3 Years' Function.
dental implant
emergence angle
emergence profile
retrospective study
sub-crestal placement
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Oct 2022
23 Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
01
10
2022
revised:
17
10
2022
accepted:
21
10
2022
entrez:
11
11
2022
pubmed:
12
11
2022
medline:
12
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess peri-implant soft tissue health for implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles. 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. 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 (CI 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
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
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
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 (CI
CONCLUSIONS
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36362471
pii: jcm11216243
doi: 10.3390/jcm11216243
pmc: PMC9654584
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Materials (Basel). 2022 May 27;15(11):
pubmed: 35683109
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Oct;32 Suppl 21:181-202
pubmed: 34642979
J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Aug;38(8):746-53
pubmed: 21752044
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Feb;20(2):169-74
pubmed: 19077152
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021 Jan;33(1):173-184
pubmed: 33470498
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020 Jan/Feb;40(1):61-70
pubmed: 31815974
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010 Aug;30(4):335-43
pubmed: 20664835
J Clin Med. 2022 Apr 04;11(7):
pubmed: 35407622
J Periodontol. 2013 Dec;84(12):1755-67
pubmed: 23451989
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Jun;17(3):497-508
pubmed: 24103157
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015 Jul-Aug;36(7):474-9
pubmed: 26247441
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Mar-Apr;25(2):309-14
pubmed: 20369089
J Clin Periodontol. 2020 Mar;47(3):392-403
pubmed: 31912511
J Periodontol. 2001 Mar;72(3):383-92
pubmed: 11327067
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 May;117(5S):e1-e105
pubmed: 28418832
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Nov;19(11):1135-40
pubmed: 18983316
Periodontol 2000. 1994 Feb;4:81-6
pubmed: 9673196
J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Feb;45(2):225-232
pubmed: 28985447
Dent J (Basel). 2022 May 16;10(5):
pubmed: 35621539
J Periodontol. 1967 Nov-Dec;38(6):Suppl:610-6
pubmed: 5237684
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015 Mar-Apr;30(2):384-90
pubmed: 25830399
Materials (Basel). 2020 Jul 13;13(14):
pubmed: 32668745
J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Mar;38 Suppl 11:1-2
pubmed: 21323697
Periodontol 2000. 1998 Jun;17:63-76
pubmed: 10337314
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2017 Sep/Oct;37(5):657-665
pubmed: 28817129
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Oct;46(10):1050-1060
pubmed: 31294473