Disparity in embrasure fill and papilla height between tooth‐ and implant‐borne fixed restorations in the anterior maxilla: a cross‐sectional study

PURPOSE: The objective of the present study was to compare inter-proximal fill and papilla height between different embrasures. MATERIAL & METHODS: One hundred and fifty non-smoking consecutive patients (mean age 54, range 32-73; 63 males and 87 females) without periodontal disease were selected in a multidisciplinary practice during regular supportive care. All had been treated for multiple tooth loss in the anterior maxilla at least 1 year earlier by means of a fixed restoration on teeth (n = 50) or implants (n = 100) using straightforward procedures (without hard and/or soft tissue augmentation). Embrasure fill was assessed by means of Jemt's papilla index and papilla height was registered following local anaesthesia by means of bone sounding by one clinician. RESULTS: Tooth-pontic and tooth-implant embrasures demonstrated comparable inter-proximal fill and papilla height (≥58% Jemt's score 3; mean papilla height ≥4.1 mm). Between missing teeth, embrasure fill and papilla height were lower regardless of the embrasure type. The implant-implant and implant-pontic embrasure demonstrated comparable outcome (≤42% Jemt's score 3; mean papilla height ≤ 3.3 mm; p ≥ 0.416), which was significantly poorer when compared to the pontic-pontic embrasure (82% Jemt's score 3; mean papilla height 3.7 mm; p ≤ 0.019). Overall, papilla index and papilla height demonstrated a weak correlation (Spearman's correlation coefficient: 0.198; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The re-establishment of a papilla is difficult when there is no tooth involved. In that scenario a short papilla should be expected and implant-borne restorations demonstrate the poorest outcome. Moreover, an implant with a pontic may not perform better than adjacent implants.