Soft tissue integration of different abutment surfaces: An experimental study with histological analysis. Issue 8 (14th June 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Canullo, Luigi; Penarrocha Oltra, David; Pesce, Paolo; Zarauz, Cristina; Lattanzio, Rossano; Penarrocha Diago, Miguel; Iezzi, Giovanna
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 32:Issue 8(2021)
• Page Start: 928
• Page End: 940
• Publication Date: 2021-06-14
• Subjects: abutment -- biologic width -- peri‐implant attachment -- soft tissue adaptation -- transmucosal collar; Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.13782
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate whether abutment surface and surface bio‐activation have an effect on soft tissue morphogenesis. Materials and Methods: 36 patients (36 implants) were included. Abutments were randomly divided into 4 groups ( n = 9): Smooth Surface—MAChined (MAC), Ultrathin Threaded Microsurface (UTM), MAC Plasma of Argon activated (Plasma‐MAC), and UTM Plasma of Argon activated (Plasma‐UTM). After 2 months of healing, soft tissue samples were collected and prepared for histological analysis. The margin of the peri‐implant mucosa (PM), the apical extension of the barrier epithelium (aJE), and the apical location of the abutment (AM) were identified. Significances of differences among groups were tested by means of the Kruskal–Wallis test and between pairs of results by means of the Mann–Whitney test. Results: The mean ( SD ) vertical dimension of the mucosa was 2.5mm (1.0), including a connective tissue portion (CTP) of 0.8mm (0.8) in the MAC group; 3.6mm (0.2) with a CTP of 1.6mm (0.4) in the Plasma‐MAC group; 3.2mm (1.0), with a CPT of 0.5mm (0.6) in the UTM; and 3.3mm (0.8), with a CPT of 0.9mm (0.7) in the Plasma‐UTM group. Statistically significant differences were observed in the aJE‐AM height and PM‐aJE profile among the four experimental groups ( p = .042 and p = .039, respectively). The Mann–Whitney test indicated differences between the Plasma‐abutments and the untreated abutments both for PM‐AM ( p = .025) and AjE‐AM ( p = .021). The differences appeared more evident when the preoperative soft tissue thickness was ≤2mm. Conclusions: Within its limits, the study demonstrated a favorable effect of the plasma treatment on the connective tissue portion tissues. Plasma‐MAC group highlighted the best performance. This behavior appeared strictly correlated with the soft tissue thickness.