PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 2, 2026Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences0 citationsOpen Access

Prevalence of Interproximal Contact Loss Between Freestanding Single Implant Supported Crowns and Adjacent Teeth: A Retrospective Study

View Full Paper
AMAyça MuhteremAPAleyna Bahar Erez PalacıEİElif İNÖNÜ

Key Points

  • The study aims to evaluate the prevalence of interproximal contact loss between implant-supported crowns and adjacent teeth while examining associated clinical factors.
  • Retrospective evaluation of 22 single-unit implants placed in 18 patients, followed for up to 24 months.
  • Assessment included clinical parameters, radiographic findings, and patient-reported outcomes.
  • Data on food impaction and adjacent tooth vitality collected during recall appointments.
  • Interproximal contact loss was detected in 68.2% of restorations, with varying rates for mesial (36.4%) and distal (40.9%) contacts.
  • 60.0% of implants with contact loss were associated with patient-reported food impaction.
  • Higher prevalence of contact loss was observed in females (86.7%) compared to males (28.6%), and 53.3% of implants with contact loss showed peri-implant mucositis.

Abstract

Purpose: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate clinical and radiographic changes in the interproximal area between single-unit implant-supported restorations and adjacent natural teeth, and to assess their relationship with periodontal and peri-implant tissue health.Materials and Methods: A total of 22 single-unit implants placed in 18 patients (mean age 52.38 ± 8.78 years) were followed for up to 24 months. During recall appointments, periodontal and peri-implant clinical parameters, radiographic findings, adjacent tooth vitality, opposing dentition status, and patient-reported food impaction were comprehensively recorded.Results: Interproximal contact loss (ICL) was detected in 68.2% of restorations, with mesial (36.4%) and distal (40.9%) contact loss observed. Additionally, contact loss affected both surfaces in 9.1% of cases. Among the 15 implants with ICL, 9 (60.0%) were associated with patient-reported food impaction. ICL prevalence was notably higher in females (86.7%) compared to males (28.6%). Peri-implant mucositis was diagnosed in 53.3% of implants exhibiting contact loss, whereas no peri-implantitis was detected.Conclusion: ICL between implant-supported restorations and adjacent natural teeth is a frequent finding often associated with food impaction and peri-implant mucosal inflammation. Therefore, regular clinical and radiographic evaluation of interproximal contacts is essential for maintaining peri-implant tissue health and ensuring long-term restorative success.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Muhterem et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1e728f30b38c64201b5c96https://doi.org/10.30621/jbachs.1880159
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper