Author:
Herrera-Pérez Paola,García-De-La-Fuente Ana María,Andia-Larrea Eztizen,Marichalar-Mendia Xabier,Aguirre-Urizar José Manuel,Aguirre-Zorzano Luis Antonio
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Rehabilitation of the anterior area when the mesio-distal space is reduced is a challenge for the clinician, due to the patient’s anatomical limitations and aesthetic requirements. Narrow Diameter Implants (NDI) are an option of treatment when the standard diameter implant is not possible, but the evidence is scarce. This prospective clinical study aims to analyze the formation of the tooth-implant papilla between the implant and the adjacent natural tooth in the maxillary lateral incisors and mandibular incisors.
Methods
A total of 40 patients treated with NDI, of titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr) alloy i.e., 2.9 mm Test Group (TG) and 3.3 mm Control Group (CG), were included. The mesiodistal distance between the adjacent natural teeth was used for implant selection, maintaining 1.5 mm between the fixation and the adjacent tooth. Clinical assessment was performed by a clinical examiner at 6 and 12 months after the final prosthesis. The primary variable was the Jemt Papillary Index. Also, implant survival rate (SR), complications, Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ), and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) such as aesthetics, chewing, phonation, comfort, and self-esteem were analyzed.
Results
A significant amount of papilla filling was observed concerning the baseline, with a trend towards more formation of the papilla in the TG, with a JPI score of 3. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding implant SR, clinical parameters, and complications. In terms of PROMs, a higher satisfaction in the TG was observed, with significant intergroup differences for aesthetics, comfort, self-esteem, and primary stability ISQ (TG: 59.05 (SD: 5.4) vs. CG: 51.55 (SD: 5.7)).
Conclusions
The 2.9 mm diameter Ti-Zr implants achieved a formation of papilla similar to 3.3 mm implants in the anterior region at 12 months of follow-up after the final prosthetic restoration. The use of Ti-Zr implants with a diameter of 2.9 mm to rehabilitate single teeth in areas of the anterior region, where the mesiodistal distance is limited, showed favorable clinical results and a high degree of satisfaction during 1 year of observation similar to 3.3 mm dental implants.
Trial registration
This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the number NCT05642520, dated 18/11/2022.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference71 articles.
1. Quirynen M, Herrera D, Teughels W, Sanz M. Implant therapy: 40 years of experience. Periodontol. 2000;2014(66):7–12.
2. Elani HW, Starr JR, Da Silva JD, Gallucci GO. Trends in Dental Implant Use in the U.S., 1999–2016, and Projections to 2026. J Dent Res. 2018;97:1424–30.
3. Cruz RS, Lemos CAA, de Batista VES, Yogui FC, Oliveira HFF, Verri FR. Narrow-diameter implants versus regular-diameter implants for rehabilitation of the anterior region: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;50:674–82.
4. Bravo-Perez M, Almerich-Silla JM, Canorea-Díaz E, Casals Peidró E, Cortés Martinicorena FJ, Expósito Delgado AJ, et al. Encuesta de Salud Oral en España 2020. RCOE. 2020;25:7–35.
5. Cosola S, Marconcini S, Giammarinaro E, Poli GL, Covani U, Barone A. Oral health-related quality of life and clinical outcomes of immediately or delayed loaded implants in the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws: a retrospective comparative study. Minerva Stomatol. 2018;67:189–95.