Assessment of crestal bone loss and periodontal parameters of polymer infiltrated ceramic network versus lithium disilicate implant hybrid abutment crowns in the esthetic zone (A randomized clinical trial)

Abstract

BackgroundLithium disilicate can be reliable when restoring implants in the esthetic zone. However, it has a high elastic modulus. This might increase the amount of forces transmitted to the crestal bone.Aim of the StudyTo evaluate the crestal bone loss and peri‐implant periodontal parameters of polymer infiltrated ceramic network compared to lithium disilicate implant‐supported hybrid abutment crowns after 12 months of follow‐up.Methodology44 patients were enrolled. They were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 22). The first group received 22 implants restored with polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network (Vitaenamic) hybrid abutment crowns. The second group received 22 implants restored with lithium disilicate (e.max) hybrid abutment crowns over immediately placed implants in the esthetic zone. Periapical radiographs were taken immediately after prosthetic placement and 1 year later utilizing a parallel technique, to assess crestal bone loss. Periodontal parameters were assessed after 1 year.ResultsRegarding crestal bone loss, a comparison between group I (Vitaenamic) and group II (e.max) was made by using an Independent t‐test, which showed an insignificant difference between them (p > 0.05). A comparison between groups I and II revealed insignificant differences regarding periodontal parameters (probing depth, bleeding on probing, visible plaque, and suppuration).ConclusionsRegarding bone stability and periodontal parameters, polymer infiltrated ceramic network and lithium disilicate hybrid abutment crowns showed comparable results. Both materials showed clinically acceptable hard and soft tissue responses.