Randomized controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for canine and posterior single‐tooth implant reconstructions: preliminary results at 1 year of function

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to test whether or not customized zirconia abutments exhibit the same survival rates in canine and posterior regions as titanium abutments, and to compare the esthetic result of the two abutment types.Material and methods: Twenty-two patients with 40 implants in posterior regions were included and the implant sites were randomly assigned to 20 customized zirconia and 20 customized titanium abutments. All-ceramic (AC) and metal-ceramic (MC) crowns were fabricated. In all except two cases, the crowns were cemented on the abutments using resin or glass-ionomer cements. Two zirconia reconstructions were screw retained. At baseline, 6 and 12 months, the reconstructions were examined for technical and biological problems. Probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque (Pl) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were assessed and compared with natural control teeth. Furthermore, the difference of color (ΔE) of the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva of control teeth was evaluated by means of a spectrophotometer (Spectroshade). The data were analyzed with Student's unpaired t-test, ANOVA and regression analyses.Results: Twenty patients with 19 zirconia and 12 titanium abutments were examined at a mean follow-up of 12.6±2.7 months. The survival rate for reconstructions and abutments was 100%. No technical or biological problems were found at the test and control sites. Two chippings (16.7%) occurred at crowns supported by titanium abutments. No difference was found regarding PPD (meanPPDZrO2 3.4±0.7 mm, mPPDTi 3.3±0.6 mm), Pl (mPlZrO2 0.2±0.3, mPlTi 0.1±1.8) and BOP (mBOPZrO2 60±30%, mBOPTi 30±40%) between the two groups. Both crowns on zirconia and titanium abutments induced a similar amount of discoloration of the soft tissue compared with the gingiva at natural teeth (ΔEZrO2 8.1±3.9, ΔETi 7.8±4.3).Conclusions: At 1 year, zirconia abutments exhibited the same survival and a similar esthetic outcome as titanium abutments. ABSTRACTObjectives: The aim of this study was to test whether or not customized zirconia abutments exhibit the same survival rates in canine and posterior regions as titanium abutments, and to compare the esthetic result of the two abutment types. Material and Methods:Twentytwo patients with 40 implants in posterior regions were included and the implant sites were randomly assigned to 20 customized zirconia and 20 customized titanium abutments. All-ceramic (AC) and metal-ceramic crowns (MC) were fabricated. In all except two cases the crowns were cemented on the abutments using resin or glass-ionomer cements. Two zirconia reconstructions were screw-retained. At baseline, 6 and 12 months, the reconstructions were examined for technical and biological problems. Probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque (Pl) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were assessed and compared to natural control teeth. Furthermore, the difference of color (∆E) of the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva of control teeth was evaluated by means of a spectrophotometer (Spectroshade). The data were analyzed with Student'...

In vivo Evaluation of Zirconia Abutments in Implant supported Restorations in Partially Edentulous Patients

“…Zirconia implant abutments can also be used to improve the esthetic outcome of implant-supported rehabilitations. 35 The study done by Sailer et al 44 had shown results not in accordance to results of this study. They showed that both crowns on zirconia and titanium abutments induced a similar amount of discoloration of the soft tissue compared with the gingiva of natural teeth.…”

Titanium-Reinforced Zirconia Abutments Versus Pure Zirconia Abutments for Implant-Supported Single Tooth Restorations: A Systematic Review.

“…However, this lack of RCTs could be attributed to the narrow scope of the review, since RCTs were found comparing other types of implant abutments. Baldini et al (23) ; Cosgarea et al (24) ; Carrillo de Albornoz et al (25) ; Ferrari et al (26), (27) ; Sailer et al (28) ; Zembic et al (29), (30) , compared different types of titanium abutments versus zirconia; while others compared between the different types of zirconia abutments: Büchi et al (31) and Thoma et al (32) compared the veneered zirconia versus white zirconia; Paolantoni et al (33) compared one-piece versus two-piece custom made zirconia anchorages and final prosthetic restoration; and Schepke et al (34) reported the comparison between stock versus customized zirconia.…”

The Biological Complication of Implant Abutment Materials.

“…After inclusion criteria regulation, fourteen studies were selected, Included studies tested customized metallic and all ceramic abutments and also provided data on standard all ceramic and metallic abutments (14)(15)(16)(17). All included studies reported a well-defined period of follow-up.…”