Effects of subgingival restorations in beagle dogs. Part II: Gingivitis

Smales, Roger J.; Nixon, K. C.; Joyce, K.P.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(79)90085-4

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies suggested that around tooth abutments, subgingival restorations may create the conditions to stimulate gingival inflammatory responses, and may provide a less suitable environment for gingival health compared to supragingival restorations . Some of the restorative factors that can condition directly and indirectly the periodontal health around tooth abutments, include defective contours of the crowns, roughness and porosity of the surfaces, and overhanging and overcontoured restorations .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tables 1-4, show that the volume of PISF and levels of IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α did not present statistically significant variations between the groups examined. This data indicate that no single investigated position of crowns margins (intracrevicular >2 mm, ≤2 mm/<1 mm, ≤1 mm/<0 mm, or extracrevicular position) was significantly more or less compatible with peri-implant tissue health.Some studies suggested that around tooth abutments, subgingival restorations may create the conditions to stimulate gingival inflammatory responses, and may provide a less suitable environment for gingival health compared to supragingival restorations [46][47][48]. Some of the restorative factors that can condition directly and indirectly the periodontal health around tooth abutments, include defective contours of the crowns, roughness and porosity of the surfaces, and overhanging and overcontoured restorations 6,49,50.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of restorative margins position on one‐stage laser‐microgrooved implants‐supported single screwed crowns: A clinical, biochemical, and microbiological analysis

Guarnieri

Nardo

Gaimari

et al. 2018

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To clinically, biochemically, and microbiologically evaluate the influence of crown margins position on one‐stage laser‐microgrooved implants. Materials and Methods Twenty‐one‐stage titanium implants with a laser‐microgrooved collar surface, supporting screwed, single crown restorations, were placed in 20 partially edentulous patients and evaluated. Clinical parameters included modified plaque index, modified gingival index, peri‐implant probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, and distance between implant shoulder and mucosal margin. The parameters were recorded at baseline (crowns delivery) and at every 6‐month recall visit, until the end of the 3 years follow‐up period. At the same time intervals, radiographic marginal bone levels were assessed at the mesial and distal aspect of the implant sites. For biochemical analysis, the volume of the peri‐implant sulcus fluid, and its levels of interleukin‐1beta (IL‐1β), interleukin‐6 (IL‐6), and of tumor necrosis factor‐α, were utilized to evaluate the peri‐implant health conditions at the end of the 3‐year follow‐up period. At the same time, microbiological analysis, including the concentration of five putative periodontal pathogens (Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Treponema denticola, and Tannerella forsythensis), were assessed. The crown margins positions were classified into four groups (A = intracrevicular position >2 mm, B = intracrevicular position ≤2 mm/<1 mm, C = intracrevicular position ≤1 mm/<0 mm, and D = extracrevicular position), and the biochemical, and microbiological parameters were evaluated at 3 years. Results No statistical differences of clinical and biochemical parameters were found between the four groups. In group A, compared to groups B, C, and D, a statistically significant higher concentration of putative periodontal pathogens was found. Conclusions Results showed that the intracrevicular deeper position of the restoration margin does not influence the clinical and biochemical peri‐implant parameters. The deeper position of the crown margin is associated with a greater amount of putative periodontal pathogenic microflora colonization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of restorative margins position on one‐stage laser‐microgrooved implants‐supported single screwed crowns: A clinical, biochemical, and microbiological analysis

Guarnieri

Nardo

Gaimari

et al. 2018

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is generally considered that placing the restoration margins subgingivally should be avoided, wherever possible, since this phenomenon may trigger periodontal disease (15,16). Subgingival restorations may unfavorably lead to dental biofilm accumulation which consequently stimulates gingival inflammatory response (15)(16)(17). Thus, subgingival restorations may provide a less suitable environmental condition for gingival health compared with the supragingival ones and unrestored tooth surfaces (15)(16)(17).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subgingival restorations may unfavorably lead to dental biofilm accumulation which consequently stimulates gingival inflammatory response (15)(16)(17). Thus, subgingival restorations may provide a less suitable environmental condition for gingival health compared with the supragingival ones and unrestored tooth surfaces (15)(16)(17). It is suggested that the material type is closely related to gingival/periodontal inflammatory response around the subgingival restorations, regardless of plaque-induced reactions (18,19).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation