Randomized controlled trial evaluated zirconia abutment timing effects on bone levels and esthetics in dental implants.
This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the impact of early versus delayed change of abutment on bone levels, soft tissue, and patient satisfaction with single-tooth immediate implants. In 26 patients, flapless immediate implants were placed in the anterior maxillary region (13-23). Postoperatively, all patients received a resin abutment with an emergence profile identical to that of the extracted tooth and were provided with a provisional resin crown. Based on the provisional abutment, a custom digital copy abutment made of zirconium with a titanium adapter was manufactured. The patients were randomized into two groups: the test group received the definitive zirconia abutment after 4 days, while the control group had the abutment changed after 3 months. In both groups, the definitive ceramic crowns were inserted 3 months post-surgery. The primary study outcome was the marginal bone level after 1 year, with peri-implant soft tissue (PES/Pink Esthetic Score) and oral-health-related quality of life (OHIP/Oral Health Impact Profile) defined as secondary parameters. No statistically significant differences for initial bone level remodeling or later bone loss were found between both groups after 1 year. Two prosthetic complications (one per group) required abutment replacement, but no implant failures occurred. Mean marginal bone levels were 0.71 ± 0.95 mm (mesial: 0.55 ± 0.97 mm, distal: 0.86 ± 1.07 mm) in the test group and 0.22 ± 0.93 mm (mesial: 0.15 ± 1.10 mm, distal: 0.30 ± 0.89 mm) in the control group. The Pink Esthetic Score (PES) was 11.9 ± 1.6 in the test group and 10.62 ± 2.87 in the control group (p = 0.39), showing no significant difference in esthetic outcomes. The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) score at 6 months was also not statistically significant for both groups. In immediate implants in the anterior maxilla, the timing of definitive zirconia abutment placement (4 days versus after 3 months) did not result in any statistically significant differences in peri-implant bone level, peri-implant esthetics, or patient-related quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pohl et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: