Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Response to Monolytic Zirconia Versus Porcelana-Fused-to-Metal Implant Coroas: Resultados Histológicos e Clínicos de um ECR
MedicinaResumo original em inglês
O que aconteceu
To assess the peri-implant soft-tissue and hard-tissue response to monolithic zirconia (ZrO2) compared to porcelain-fused-to-metal implant crowns (PFMs).
This report constitutes a pre-specified secondary analysis of this RCT. Eighty-three patients rehabilitated with single-tooth implants in the molar region were originally randomly assigned to receive either a ZrO2 or a PFM restoration. At 6 months, clinical parameters (plaque control record, probing depth, bleeding on probing, width of keratinised mucosa and marginal bone level changes) were recorded at the implant site and the adjacent natural tooth. In addition, a peri-implant soft-tissue biopsy specimen was harvested between the implant site and the adjacent tooth. The number of inflammatory cells and fibroblasts/fibrocytes was evaluated within four regions of interest (oral epithelium, sulcular epithelium, junctional epithelium, connective tissue). Descriptive statistics were arrived at for all outcomes, and differences between prosthetic materials, sites and timepoints were analysed using linear mixed-effects models.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02272491.
O que encontraram
The present exploratory secondary analysis included 67 patients (37 ZrO2; 30 PFM) with complete 6-month clinical, radiographic and histological data. Clinical parameters at both implant and adjacent tooth sites remained generally stable from baseline to 6 months, with limited marginal bone level changes and comparable outcomes between groups. Histologically, mixed-effects model analysis showed that the tissue region significantly affected both the inflammatory infiltrate and the fibroblast density (p < 0.001). The crown materials did not substantially influence the histological outcomes. The distribution of inflammatory infiltrate differed between tooth and implant sites, with the highest values in the sulcular epithelium around implants and in the junctional epithelium around teeth. Fibroblast density was highest in the junctional epithelium at both sites.
Por que isso importa
Monolithic zirconia and PFM implant-supported single crowns resulted in comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes. The peri-implant soft-tissue response to the two restorative materials showed a greater effect of the tissue region, while the material itself had only negligible effect.
Resumo publicado sob licença CC BY. A tradução para o português ainda não chegou a este estudo.
O estudo original
Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Response to Monolithic Zirconia Versus Porcelain-Fused-to-Metal Implant Crowns: Histological and Clinical Outcomes of an RCT
Yifan Zhang, Sven Mühlemann, Aspasia Pachiou, Stephanie Astrid Stalder, Ronald E Jung, Ye Lin, Daniel Stefan Thoma
Descritores MeSH
- Dental Implants, Single-Tooth
- Periodontium
- Zirconium
- Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
- Dental Porcelain
- Metal Ceramic Alloys
- Crowns
- Epithelial Attachment
- Connective Tissue
- Gingiva
Estudos relacionados
- Validation of different indices for the assessment of single tooth-supported prostheses in the esthetic zone: A feasibility clinical study
- Aesthetic outcomes of different materials for delayed, single-tooth restorations for immediately placed implants. A randomized controlled clinical trial
- Clinical outcomes of all-ceramic single crowns and fixed dental prostheses supported by ceramic implants: A systematic review and meta-analyses
- Ajuste marginal e resultados de cinco anos de restaurações de zircônia monolítica posterior: Estudo clínico randomizado pareado e observacional