El-Danasory Muhammed B, Khamis Mohamed Moataz, Abdel Hakim Ahmed Adel, Fahmy Rania A
Assistant Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Professor and Chairman, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
J Prosthet Dent. 2025 Feb;133(2):472-480. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.02.012. Epub 2023 Mar 23.
Providing a definitive restoration with an emergence profile matching that of the contralateral or extracted tooth should result in an esthetic peri-implant soft tissue contour. Whether a custom healing abutment improves the outcome of a bio-copied definitive restoration compared with a stock abutment is unclear.
The purpose of this 1-year randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the peri-implant soft and hard tissues related to bio-esthetic single implant-supported restorations having a contralateral tooth-matching restorative emergence profile after peri-implant soft tissue conditioning with either custom or stock healing abutment for patients indicated for immediate implant placement.
Twenty-four participants indicated for immediate implant placement in the maxillary esthetic zone received bio-esthetic single implant-supported restorations after peri-implant soft tissue conditioning with either a custom healing abutment (n=12) or a stock healing abutment (n=12). The pink and white esthetic score (PES-WES) was evaluated 6 and 12 months after implant placement. Peri-implant bone changes were measured with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans at the same intervals.
The PES-WES showed significant difference between the 2 groups at 6 and 12 months. The CBCT scans did not show significant difference between the 2 groups.
The use of the bio-esthetic concept for immediate single implant placement achieved successful esthetic restorations after conditioning the peri-implant tissues using either custom or stock healing abutments. However, the use of custom healing abutments was associated with higher PES-WES values in comparison with the use of stock healing abutments.
提供一个具有与对侧或拔除牙齿相匹配的龈缘轮廓的最终修复体，应能形成美观的种植体周围软组织轮廓。与标准基台相比，定制愈合基台是否能改善生物复制最终修复体的效果尚不清楚。
本为期1年的随机临床试验的目的是，在种植体周围软组织使用定制或标准愈合基台进行即刻种植的患者中，评估与具有对侧牙齿匹配修复体龈缘轮廓的生物美学单颗种植体支持修复体相关的种植体周围软硬组织情况。
24名上颌美学区即刻种植的参与者在种植体周围软组织使用定制愈合基台（n = 12）或标准愈合基台（n = 12）进行处理后，接受了生物美学单颗种植体支持的修复体。在种植后6个月和12个月评估粉红和白色美学评分（PES-WES）。同时段用锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）测量种植体周围骨变化。
在6个月和12个月时，两组的PES-WES有显著差异。CBCT扫描显示两组间无显著差异。
对于即刻单颗种植体植入，采用生物美学概念，在使用定制或标准愈合基台对种植体周围组织进行处理后，均实现了成功的美学修复。然而，与使用标准愈合基台相比，使用定制愈合基台的PES-WES值更高。
