Chairside vs Prefabricated Sealing Socket Abutments for Posterior Immediate Implants: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IF 4 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Pub Date : 2025-07-22 DOI:10.1111/cid.70076

Vitālijs Gnusins, Samuel Akhondi, Tadas Zvirblis, Kevser Pala, German O. Gallucci, Algirdas Puisys

{"title":"Chairside vs Prefabricated Sealing Socket Abutments for Posterior Immediate Implants: A Randomized Clinical Trial","authors":"Vitālijs Gnusins, Samuel Akhondi, Tadas Zvirblis, Kevser Pala, German O. Gallucci, Algirdas Puisys","doi":"10.1111/cid.70076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare changes in soft tissue height, probing depth, and buccal contour volume loss following immediate implant placement using either chairside composite or prefabricated zirconia Sealing Socket Abutments (SSAs) in the posterior region.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>47 patients requiring posterior tooth extraction and immediate implant placement were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the composite Sealing Socket Abutment (CS) group (<i>n</i> = 24), receiving chairside-fabricated abutments, or the zirconia Sealing Socket Abutment (ZR) group (<i>n</i> = 23), receiving prefabricated abutments. Implants were placed immediately after extraction, using static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS). Supra-Platform Tissue Height (SPTH) and total horizontal tissues (THT) were assessed using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) over a 3-month healing period. Implant survival, probing pocket depths (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PI) were recorded clinically, while volumetric analysis was performed using digital impressions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>SPTH remained stable from baseline to the 3-month follow-up, with a mean change of −0.17 mm in the CS group and −0.44 mm in the ZR group. These differences were not statistically significant (<i>p</i> > 0.05). THT exhibited significant horizontal shrinkage in both groups over the 3-month period. In the CS group, THT decreased by 1.00 mm, while the ZR group showed a reduction of 1.17 mm (<i>p</i> < 0.001). PPD increased in the CS group from 2.8 mm to 3.7 mm on the palatal/lingual aspect and from 2.5 mm to 3.2 mm on the buccal aspect (<i>p</i> = 0.026). In contrast, the ZR group showed a decrease from 3.1 mm to 2.7 mm palatally/lingually and remained stable buccally at 2.6 mm to 2.7 mm (<i>p</i> = 0.001). BOP in the CS group decreased from 42.3% to 7.7% (<i>p</i> = 0.009), while the ZR group maintained low BOP levels, decreasing slightly from 17.4% to 4.4% (<i>p</i> = 0.346).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Both approaches showed comparable outcomes. ZR abutments resulted in shallower probing depths, while CS abutments showed less volumetric shrinkage. SPTH remained stable in both groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>This trial was registered prior to patient enrollment at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05748379</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"27 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.70076","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare changes in soft tissue height, probing depth, and buccal contour volume loss following immediate implant placement using either chairside composite or prefabricated zirconia Sealing Socket Abutments (SSAs) in the posterior region.

Materials and Methods

47 patients requiring posterior tooth extraction and immediate implant placement were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the composite Sealing Socket Abutment (CS) group (n = 24), receiving chairside-fabricated abutments, or the zirconia Sealing Socket Abutment (ZR) group (n = 23), receiving prefabricated abutments. Implants were placed immediately after extraction, using static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS). Supra-Platform Tissue Height (SPTH) and total horizontal tissues (THT) were assessed using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) over a 3-month healing period. Implant survival, probing pocket depths (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PI) were recorded clinically, while volumetric analysis was performed using digital impressions.

Results

SPTH remained stable from baseline to the 3-month follow-up, with a mean change of −0.17 mm in the CS group and −0.44 mm in the ZR group. These differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). THT exhibited significant horizontal shrinkage in both groups over the 3-month period. In the CS group, THT decreased by 1.00 mm, while the ZR group showed a reduction of 1.17 mm (p < 0.001). PPD increased in the CS group from 2.8 mm to 3.7 mm on the palatal/lingual aspect and from 2.5 mm to 3.2 mm on the buccal aspect (p = 0.026). In contrast, the ZR group showed a decrease from 3.1 mm to 2.7 mm palatally/lingually and remained stable buccally at 2.6 mm to 2.7 mm (p = 0.001). BOP in the CS group decreased from 42.3% to 7.7% (p = 0.009), while the ZR group maintained low BOP levels, decreasing slightly from 17.4% to 4.4% (p = 0.346).

Conclusions

Both approaches showed comparable outcomes. ZR abutments resulted in shallower probing depths, while CS abutments showed less volumetric shrinkage. SPTH remained stable in both groups.

Trial Registration

This trial was registered prior to patient enrollment at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05748379

查看原文本刊更多论文

椅侧与预制密封槽基台用于后牙即刻种植：一项随机临床试验

目的：本随机临床试验旨在比较使用椅边复合材料或预制氧化锆密封槽基台（SSAs）在后牙区立即放置种植体后软组织高度、探探深度和颊轮廓体积损失的变化。材料和方法将47例需要后牙拔牙并立即种植的患者随机分为两组：复合密封槽基台组（n = 24），接受椅子制作的基台，或氧化锆密封槽基台组（n = 23），接受预制基台。采用静态计算机辅助种植手术（sCAIS），拔牙后立即放置种植体。超平台组织高度（SPTH）和总水平组织（THT）在3个月的愈合期间使用锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）进行评估。临床记录种植体存活、探针口袋深度（PPD）、探针出血（BOP）和斑块指数（PI），同时使用数字印模进行体积分析。结果SPTH从基线到随访3个月保持稳定，CS组平均变化为- 0.17 mm， ZR组平均变化为- 0.44 mm。这些差异无统计学意义（p > 0.05）。在3个月的时间里，两组的THT都表现出明显的水平萎缩。CS组THT减少1.00 mm， ZR组THT减少1.17 mm （p < 0.001）。CS组的PPD在腭/舌侧从2.8 mm增加到3.7 mm，在颊侧从2.5 mm增加到3.2 mm （p = 0.026）。相比之下，ZR组上颚/舌部从3.1 mm降至2.7 mm，颊部稳定在2.6 mm至2.7 mm （p = 0.001）。CS组的BOP从42.3%下降到7.7% (p = 0.009)，而ZR组保持较低的BOP水平，从17.4%略微下降到4.4% （p = 0.346）。结论两种方法的结果相当。ZR基台探深较浅，CS基台体积收缩较小。两组SPTH均保持稳定。该试验在患者入组前在ClinicalTrials.gov注册，注册编号：NCT05748379

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

6.00

自引率

13.90%

发文量

103

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal. The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to: New scientific developments relating to bone Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues Computer aided implant designs Computer aided prosthetic designs Immediate implant loading Immediate implant placement Materials relating to bone induction and conduction New surgical methods relating to implant placement New materials and methods relating to implant restorations Methods for determining implant stability A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.