Janina Endres, Franz J. Strauss, Marina Siegenthaler, Nadja Naenni, Ronald E. Jung, Daniel S. Thoma
{"title":"美学区种植体支持的冠的凸出与凹出：一项为期3年的随机对照试验结果","authors":"Janina Endres, Franz J. Strauss, Marina Siegenthaler, Nadja Naenni, Ronald E. Jung, Daniel S. Thoma","doi":"10.1111/jcpe.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the 3-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported restorations with different emergence profiles (CONVEX vs. CONCAVE).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 47 patients received a single implant in the aesthetic zone and were allocated to one of three groups: (1) CONVEX: customized provisional with a convex emergence profile (<i>n</i> = 15); (2) CONCAVE: customized provisional with a concave profile (<i>n</i> = 16); (3) Control: no provisional restoration (<i>n</i> = 16). Final crowns in groups CONVEX and CONCAVE were fabricated to replicate the emergence profile of the respective provisional restorations. Follow-ups were performed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year and 3 years. The primary outcome was mid-facial mucosal recession and secondary outcomes included clinical, radiographic and aesthetic outcomes as well as profilometric measurements. Multivariable logistic regressions and mixed-effects models were used to compare the groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Out of the 47 patients originally included, 42 were available for re-examination at 3 years follow-up. At 3 years, the frequency of mucosal recession amounted to 46.7% in group CONVEX, 13.3% in group CONCAVE and 40.0% in group Control. Adjusted logistic regression models revealed that the CONVEX group was significantly more likely to show recessions at 3 years (odds ratios [ORs]: 7.3, 95% CI: 1.02–52.14, <i>p</i> = 0.048) when compared with the CONCAVE group. No statistically significant difference in recession frequency was observed between the CONVEX and CONCAVE groups between the 1- and 3-year follow-ups (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 0.30–46.09, <i>p</i> = 0.303).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The emergence profile design significantly influences soft tissue stability predominantly within the first year after crown insertion. Whenever clinically feasible, a CONCAVE profile is preferable in the aesthetic zone to maintain the level of the mid-facial mucosal margin and reduce the frequency of recessions.</p>\n \n <p>\n <b>Trial Registration:</b> German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00009420</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","volume":"52 11","pages":"1605-1615"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcpe.70018","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Convex Versus Concave Emergence Profile of Implant-Supported Crowns in the Aesthetic Zone: 3-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial\",\"authors\":\"Janina Endres, Franz J. Strauss, Marina Siegenthaler, Nadja Naenni, Ronald E. Jung, Daniel S. Thoma\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcpe.70018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate the 3-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported restorations with different emergence profiles (CONVEX vs. CONCAVE).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 47 patients received a single implant in the aesthetic zone and were allocated to one of three groups: (1) CONVEX: customized provisional with a convex emergence profile (<i>n</i> = 15); (2) CONCAVE: customized provisional with a concave profile (<i>n</i> = 16); (3) Control: no provisional restoration (<i>n</i> = 16). Final crowns in groups CONVEX and CONCAVE were fabricated to replicate the emergence profile of the respective provisional restorations. Follow-ups were performed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year and 3 years. The primary outcome was mid-facial mucosal recession and secondary outcomes included clinical, radiographic and aesthetic outcomes as well as profilometric measurements. Multivariable logistic regressions and mixed-effects models were used to compare the groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Out of the 47 patients originally included, 42 were available for re-examination at 3 years follow-up. At 3 years, the frequency of mucosal recession amounted to 46.7% in group CONVEX, 13.3% in group CONCAVE and 40.0% in group Control. Adjusted logistic regression models revealed that the CONVEX group was significantly more likely to show recessions at 3 years (odds ratios [ORs]: 7.3, 95% CI: 1.02–52.14, <i>p</i> = 0.048) when compared with the CONCAVE group. No statistically significant difference in recession frequency was observed between the CONVEX and CONCAVE groups between the 1- and 3-year follow-ups (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 0.30–46.09, <i>p</i> = 0.303).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The emergence profile design significantly influences soft tissue stability predominantly within the first year after crown insertion. Whenever clinically feasible, a CONCAVE profile is preferable in the aesthetic zone to maintain the level of the mid-facial mucosal margin and reduce the frequency of recessions.</p>\\n \\n <p>\\n <b>Trial Registration:</b> German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00009420</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Periodontology\",\"volume\":\"52 11\",\"pages\":\"1605-1615\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcpe.70018\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Periodontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpe.70018\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpe.70018","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Convex Versus Concave Emergence Profile of Implant-Supported Crowns in the Aesthetic Zone: 3-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Aim
To evaluate the 3-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported restorations with different emergence profiles (CONVEX vs. CONCAVE).
Materials and Methods
A total of 47 patients received a single implant in the aesthetic zone and were allocated to one of three groups: (1) CONVEX: customized provisional with a convex emergence profile (n = 15); (2) CONCAVE: customized provisional with a concave profile (n = 16); (3) Control: no provisional restoration (n = 16). Final crowns in groups CONVEX and CONCAVE were fabricated to replicate the emergence profile of the respective provisional restorations. Follow-ups were performed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year and 3 years. The primary outcome was mid-facial mucosal recession and secondary outcomes included clinical, radiographic and aesthetic outcomes as well as profilometric measurements. Multivariable logistic regressions and mixed-effects models were used to compare the groups.
Results
Out of the 47 patients originally included, 42 were available for re-examination at 3 years follow-up. At 3 years, the frequency of mucosal recession amounted to 46.7% in group CONVEX, 13.3% in group CONCAVE and 40.0% in group Control. Adjusted logistic regression models revealed that the CONVEX group was significantly more likely to show recessions at 3 years (odds ratios [ORs]: 7.3, 95% CI: 1.02–52.14, p = 0.048) when compared with the CONCAVE group. No statistically significant difference in recession frequency was observed between the CONVEX and CONCAVE groups between the 1- and 3-year follow-ups (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 0.30–46.09, p = 0.303).
Conclusion
The emergence profile design significantly influences soft tissue stability predominantly within the first year after crown insertion. Whenever clinically feasible, a CONCAVE profile is preferable in the aesthetic zone to maintain the level of the mid-facial mucosal margin and reduce the frequency of recessions.
Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00009420
期刊介绍：
Journal of Clinical Periodontology was founded by the British, Dutch, French, German, Scandinavian, and Swiss Societies of Periodontology.
The aim of the Journal of Clinical Periodontology is to provide the platform for exchange of scientific and clinical progress in the field of Periodontology and allied disciplines, and to do so at the highest possible level. The Journal also aims to facilitate the application of new scientific knowledge to the daily practice of the concerned disciplines and addresses both practicing clinicians and academics. The Journal is the official publication of the European Federation of Periodontology but wishes to retain its international scope.
The Journal publishes original contributions of high scientific merit in the fields of periodontology and implant dentistry. Its scope encompasses the physiology and pathology of the periodontium, the tissue integration of dental implants, the biology and the modulation of periodontal and alveolar bone healing and regeneration, diagnosis, epidemiology, prevention and therapy of periodontal disease, the clinical aspects of tooth replacement with dental implants, and the comprehensive rehabilitation of the periodontal patient. Review articles by experts on new developments in basic and applied periodontal science and associated dental disciplines, advances in periodontal or implant techniques and procedures, and case reports which illustrate important new information are also welcome.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
