Comparison of clinical esthetic effects of two abutments of maxillary anterior dental implants with single crown
10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20240219-00078
- VernacularTitle:两种上颌前牙种植单冠修复基台临床美学效果的比较
- Author:
Na WANG
1
;
Miaomiao YANG
;
Wei QIN
Author Information
1. 大连市口腔医院种植科，大连 116021
- Keywords:
Esthetics, dental;
Dental implantation;
Dental implants, single-tooth;
Dental implant-abutment design
- From:
Chinese Journal of Stomatology
2024;59(6):571-577
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare and evaluate the clinical esthetic effect of angle screw channel abutment and personalized zirconia adhesive abutment for single crown restoration in esthetic area.Methods:A total of 44 patients (21 males and 23 females), aged (37.4±13.5) years (18-67 years) who completed single crown restoration in the esthetic area of the Department of Oral Implantology, Dalian Stomatological Hospital from January 2018 to June 2022 were retrospectively selected. A total of 44 implants were inserted. According to the abutment selected for final restoration, the patients were divided into angle screw channel abutment group and personalized zirconia bonding abutment group, with 22 patients and 22 implants in each group. The implant survival rate, complication rate, pink and white esthetic score and marginal bone resorption were compared between the two groups.Results:Follow-up to 12 months after final restoration, implant survival rates were 100% (22/22) in both groups, and there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of mechanical complications between the two groups [9% (2/22) in the angle screw channel abutment group and 0(0/22) in the personalized zirconia bonding abutment group, χ 2=2.10, P=0.148]. In the follow-up appointment 12 months after final restoration, the pink esthetic score of the angle screw channel abutment group (12.95±1.05) was significantly better than that of the personalized zirconia bonding abutment group (11.45±2.02) ( t=3.10, P=0.003). There was no significant difference in white esthetic scores between the two groups ( t=1.27, P=0.212). There was no significant difference in the marginal bone resorption between the two groups ( t=0.32, P=0.749). Conclusions:When a single implant supported restoration is delivered in the esthetic area of the anterior maxilla, high implant survival rate and stability of the marginal bone can be obtained by using the angle screw channel abutment or the personalized zirconia bonding abutment. The clinical efficacy of the angle screw channel system is reliable, and it will provide clinicians with a new treatment option.
