Comparison of Stock and Customized Implant Abutments Regarding Peri-Implant Health : Comparison of Stock and Customized Implant Abutments

Hanieh Ehtesham; Seyed Mohammadreza Hakimaneh; Maryam Tehranchi; Sahel Shahrestani

doi:10.31661/gmj.v13iSP1.3595

Authors

Hanieh Ehtesham Faculty of Dentistry, Shahed University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Seyed Mohammadreza Hakimaneh Prosthodontics Department, Shahed University Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Maryam Tehranchi Periodontology Department, Shahed University Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran, Iran
Sahel Shahrestani Periodontology Department, Shahed University Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.v13iSP1.3595

Keywords:

Dental Implants; Dental Implant-Abutment Design; Peri-Implantitis; Periodontal Index

Abstract

Background: Dental implants are one of the most predictable treatment options for replacement of the lost teeth. One of the factors affecting the success of an implant, is the health of the periodontium around the implant abutment. Recently, various materials has been used for fabrication of implant abutments. This study aimed to assess early marginal bone loss (MBL) and periodontal parameters around dental implants with titanium stock abutments and customized abutments fabricated by the computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology to compare their success rate during a 1-year period. Materials and Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted on 64 patients whose treatment plan included the stock abutment, and CAD/CAM customized abutment that were randomly selected. All patients underwent a clinical periodontal examination on the day of prosthetic crown delivery, and parallel periapical radiographs were obtained. The probing pocket depth (PPD), papilla bleeding index (PBI), keratinized gingiva width (KGW), plaque index (PI), and modified gingival index (MGI) around dental implants were calculated and recorded. Periodontal and radiographic indices, and MBL were measured at the one-year follow-up. Results: The stock and customized abutments had no significant difference regarding MBL, PPD, PBI, MGI, PI and KGW. The survival rate and success rate were equally 100% in the two groups. Conclusion: The two abutment types had no significant difference in any clinical parameter. Thus, stock or CAD/CAM customized abutments may be selected according to secondary parameters such as software availability, personal preferences, ease of fabrication and cost.

References

Jarman JM, Hamalian T, Randi AP. Comparing the fracture resistance of alternatively engineered zirconia abutments with original equipment manufactured abutments with different implant connection designs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32(5):992-1000.

https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5236

PMid:28296983

French D, Cochran DL, Ofec R. Retrospective cohort study of 4,591 Straumann implants placed in 2,060 patients in private practice with up to 10-year follow-up: The relationship between crestal bone level and soft tissue condition. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(6):e168-e178.

https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4932

PMid:27861661

Axiotis JP, et al. One-piece implants with smooth concave neck to enhance soft tissue development and preserve marginal bone levels: A retrospective study with 1- to 6-year follow-up. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:2908484.

https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2908484

PMid:30140692 PMCid:PMC6081599

Lops D, et al. Interproximal papilla stability around CAD/CAM and stock abutments in anterior regions: A 2-year prospective multicenter cohort study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2017;37(5):657-665.

https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.3184

PMid:28817129

Long L, Alqarni H, Masri R. Influence of implant abutment fabrication method on clinical outcomes: a systematic review. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017 Jan;10(1):67-77.

Benakatti V, Sajjanar JA, Acharya AR. Dental implant abutments and their selection-A review. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2021;10(35):3053-3060.

https://doi.org/10.14260/jemds/2021/622

Schepke U, et al. Stock versus CAD/CAM customized zirconia implant abutments - Clinical and patient-based outcomes in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19(1):74-84.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12440

PMid:27476829 PMCid:PMC5297995

Paek J, et al. Comparative analysis of screw loosening with prefabricated abutments and customized CAD/CAM abutments. Implant Dent. 2016;25(6):770-774.

https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000481

PMid:27571352

Wittneben J, et al. Esthetic and clinical performance of implant-supported all-ceramic crowns made with prefabricated or CAD/CAM zirconia abutments: A randomized, multicenter clinical trial. J Dent Res. 2016;96:0022034516681767.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034516681767

PMid:27927884

Chokaree P, Poovarodom P, Chaijareenont P, Yavirach A, Rungsiyakull P. Biomaterials and clinical applications of customized healing abutment-a narrative review. J Funct Biomater. 2022 Dec 10;13(4):291.

https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb13040291

PMid:36547551 PMCid:PMC9781385

Saxer UP, Mühlemann HR. [Motivation and education]. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd. 1975;85(9):905-919.

Loe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy II Correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontl Scand. 1964;22:121-35.

https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356408993968

PMid:14158464

Tobias G, Spanier AB. Modified gingival index (MGI) classification using dental selfies. Appl Sci. 2020;10(24):8923.

https://doi.org/10.3390/app10248923

-Kang SH, et al. Survival rate and clinical evaluation of the implants in implant assisted removable partial dentures: Surveyed crown and overdenture. J Adv Prosthodont. 2020;12(4):239-249.

https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.4.239

PMid:32879715 PMCid:PMC7449826

Buser D, et al. Regeneration and enlargement of jaw bone using guided tissue regeneration. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1990;1(1):22-32.

https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1990.010104.x

PMid:2099209

Gallo S, Pascadopoli M, Pellegrini M, Pulicari F, Manfredini M, Zampetti P, Spadari F, Maiorana C, Scribante A. CAD/CAM abutments versus stock abutments: An update review. Prosthesis. 2022 Aug 16;4(3):468-479.

https://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis4030038

Romeo E, et al. Long-term survival and success of oral implants in the treatment of full and partial arches: A 7-year prospective study with the ITI dental implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(2):247-259.

Wittneben JG, et al. Clinical and esthetic outcomes of two different prosthetic workflows for implant-supported all-ceramic single crowns-3 year results of a randomized multicenter clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31(5):495-505.

https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13586

PMid:32012346

Linkevicius T, Vaitelis J. The effect of zirconia or titanium as abutment material on soft peri-implant tissues: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26 Suppl 11:139-147.

https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12631

PMid:26073346

Borzangy S. A comparison of zirconia CAD/CAM to conventionally fabricated single implant restorations in the esthetic zone. Doctoral dissertation: Harvard School of Dental Medicine; 2015.

Pamato S, et al. The influence of titanium base abutments on peri-implant soft tissue inflammatory parameters and marginal bone loss: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2020;22(4):542-548.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12900

PMid:32441407

Di Domênico MB, Farias Collares K, Bergoli CD, dos Santos MB, Corazza PH, Özcan M. Factors related to early marginal bone loss in dental implants-A multicenter observational clinical study. Appl Sci. 2021 Nov 25;11(23):11197.

https://doi.org/10.3390/app112311197

Guljé FL, et al. Comparison of 6-mm and 11-mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5-year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021;32(1):15-22.

https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13674

PMid:33025645 PMCid:PMC7821315

Merli M, et al. Inter-rater agreement in the diagnosis of mucositis and peri-implantitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2014;41(9):927-933.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12291

PMid:25041651

Wennström JL, Bengazi F, Lekholm U. The influence of the masticatory mucosa on the peri-implant soft tissue condition. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1994;5:1-8.

https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1994.050101.x

PMid:8038340

Chung DM, Oh TJ, Shotwell JL, Misch CE, Wang HL. Significance of keratinized mucosa in maintenance of dental implants with different surfaces. J Periodontol. 2006 Aug;77(8):1410-1420.

https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2006.050393

PMid:16881810

Comparison of Stock and Customized Implant Abutments Regarding Peri-Implant Health