This study demonstrates that the type of abutment and the gingival thickness affect the resulting peri-implant gingival color.

BackgroundThe gingival thickness seems to have an important role in different dental treatments. There are different methods of quantifying this thickness, but it is not known which of them can be the most effective. The objective to assess the accuracy of two different methods for gingival thickness measurement: the transgingival needle probing (TGNP) and the tension-free caliper (TFC) in an in vitro model, by comparing them with direct physical measurements (reference standard).Material and MethodsGingival thickness (GT) was evaluated in 27 female pigs with four implant sites 1, 2 and 3mm from the gingival margin with three different methods: 1) transgingival needle probing 2) tension-free caliper and 3) Direct visualization after making a incision in the mucosa and measuring GT with a periodontal probe. Wilcoxon test for paired samples were used with a confident level of 95%.ResultsA total of 324 points were measured, 59% of the sites presented a thin biotype with DV, it was correctly assessed with the TGNP in 84% of the times and in 86% with the TFC. 41% of the sample presented thick biotype, 76% was the percentage measured with the TGNP and 0% of the sites evaluated with TFC resulted in this biotype.ConclusionsTransgingival needle probing constitutes an accurate method when measuring GT at different levels. Tension free caliper is not a good tool for assessing the gingival biotype as long as it is unable to predict thick biotype. Key words:Periodontal Biotype, Gingival Thickness, Periodontal Tissue and Diagnosis.

No abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the survival and biological and mechanical complications of one-piece and two-piece zirconia implants at five years of loading.Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients receiving zirconia implants were studied, collecting data at five years of loading on their clinical history, peri-implant health status, mechanical complications, esthetic results, and patient related outcomes. Results:The study included 18 patients with 29 implants. The survival rate was 86% in implant-based analysis and 78% in patient-based analysis. There were no cases of peri-implantitis, but mucositis was present in 53% of implants. A mean of 4.1 ± 0.81 mm was obtained for probing depth and 1.6 ± 0.9 mm for crestal bone loss (radiographic assessment). There were no implant fractures. Major (10%) and minor (10%) prosthesis complications were observed. The esthetic outcome was moderate to almost perfect, with a high level of patient satisfaction. No significant association was found between survival rate and the presence of mucositis around one-or twopiece implants or any other study variable. Conclusions:The survival rate is low for one-and two-piece zirconia implants. Both types of implants demonstrated a low mechanical complication rate. The incidence of periimplantitis is low but mucositis is present in 50%. Patient satisfaction related to esthetics and function is moderate to high. They represent a good option for patients requiring an alternative to titanium implants.Clinical Relevance: Zirconia implants appear to be an alternative to the titanium option and may be indicated for patients requiring "metal-free" restorations.