Clinical and histological comparison of the soft tissue morphology between zirconia and titanium dental implants under healthy and experimental mucositis conditions—A randomized controlled clinical trial

Objectives To analyse the soft tissue morphology under healthy and experimental mucositis conditions comparing zirconia and titanium implants. Methods Forty‐two patients with two adjacent missing teeth received one zirconia (Zr) and one titanium (Ti) implant, with the mesial and distal position rand...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical periodontology 2021-05, Vol.48 (5), p.721-733
Main Authors: Bienz, Stefan P., Hilbe, Monika, Hüsler, Jürg, Thoma, Daniel S., Hämmerle, Christoph H. F., Jung, Ronald E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biopsy
Bleeding
Clinical trials
Dental implants
Dental Implants - adverse effects
Dental prosthetics
Dentistry
Epithelium
histology
histomorphometry
Humans
Hygiene
Inflammation
Morphology
Mucositis
Oral hygiene
peri‐implant soft tissue
Titanium
Transplants & implants
Zirconia
zirconia implant
Zirconium
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives To analyse the soft tissue morphology under healthy and experimental mucositis conditions comparing zirconia and titanium implants. Methods Forty‐two patients with two adjacent missing teeth received one zirconia (Zr) and one titanium (Ti) implant, with the mesial and distal position randomized. At 3 months, half of the patients were instructed to continue (healthy; h) and the other half to omit (experimental mucositis; m) oral hygiene around the implants for 3 weeks. Clinical parameters were evaluated before and after the experimental phase, and a soft tissue biopsy was harvested. Mixed model analyses were performed to analyse the data. Results The plaque control record increased significantly for the two mucositis groups, reaching 68.3 ± 31.9% (mean ± SD) for Zr‐m and 75.0 ± 29.4% for Ti‐m (p 
ISSN:0303-6979
1600-051X
DOI:10.1111/jcpe.13411