Abstract:Purpose: To assess the effect of implant abutment material and soft tissue thickness on the peri-implant soft tissue color using spectrophotometry and to evaluate gingival esthetics and patient satisfaction with three different abutments. Materials and methods: Twenty-five patients with a missing maxillary tooth in the esthetic area received an endosseous implant using a two-stage protocol. Gray titanium, pink anodized titanium, and hybrid zirconia custom abutments were fabricated for each participant and inserted for one week with a cross-over design in a randomized manner. Color measurements were made using a spectrophotometer comparing midfacial peri-implant soft tissue and marginal gingiva of the contralateral tooth. CIE Lab color scale was used following the formula: ΔE = [(∆L)2 + (∆a)2 + (∆b)2 ]½ . PES scores were recorded, and patient satisfaction questionnaires were completed at each abutment change visit and at 1-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed using Friedman's test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction as well as the Mann-Whitney U test (α = 0.05). Results: Abutment material type significantly affected the ΔΕ values of the peri-implant mucosa when compared to the contralateral teeth. At baseline, the highest ΔΕ means ± standard deviation (SD) values were obtained with gray titanium (11.25 ± 2.98), followed by pink anodized titanium (9.90 ± 2.51), and zirconia abutments (6.46 ± 1.43). Differences were statistically significant irrespective of soft tissue thickness. The highest PES values were obtained with zirconia abutments (10.88 ± 0.88), followed by pink anodized titanium (10.12 ± 1.13) and the lowest with gray titanium (9.68 ± 1.41). PES differences were significant only for the thin soft tissue group. Regarding patient satisfaction, VAS scores for the pink anodized and zirconia hybrid abutment groups were higher than the gray titanium group for each question. Conclusion: The color difference between soft tissues around teeth and implants was significant in all groups regardless of tissue thickness. The hybrid zirconia abutments resulted in the least color difference, followed by pink anodized and gray titanium. Significantly different PES values were recorded only for the thin tissue group. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between zirconia and pink anodized abutments at the 1-year follow up. Pink anodized abutments represent a good esthetic alternative to zirconia hybrid abutments especially in mechanically challenging situations.

"Aesthetic outcomes of different materials for delayed, single-tooth restorations for immediately placed implants. A randomized controlled clinical trial".

Peri-implant Marginal Bone Changes with Implant-Supported Metal-Ceramic or Monolithic Zirconia Single Crowns: A Retrospective Clinical Study of 1 to 5 Years.

Single‐piece zirconia versus single‐piece titanium, narrow‐diameter dental implants in the anterior maxilla: 5‐year post‐loading results of a randomized clinical trial

Clinical assessment of different implant-supported esthetic crown systems fabricated with semi-digital workflow: Two-year prospective study

Five-year outcomes of a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing single-tooth implant-supported restoration with either zirconia or titanium abutments

An Esthetic Evaluation of Different Abutment Materials in the Anterior Maxilla: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Using a Crossover Design

A multicenter randomized controlled clinical pilot study of buccally micro-veneered lithium-disilicate and zirconia crowns supported by titanium base abutments: 1-year outcomes

Single tooth restoration in the maxillary esthetic zone using a one-piece ceramic implant with 1 year of follow-up: case series

Titanium vs ceramic single dental implants in the anterior maxilla: A 12‐month randomized clinical trial

Implant‐supported single all‐ceramic crowns made from prefabricated (stock) or individualized CAD/CAM zirconia abutments: A 5 year randomized clinical trial

Immediately versus early placed bone‐level‐tapered implants supporting all‐ceramic crowns on titanium base abutments: 1‐year radiographic and pink esthetic outcomes of a multicenter pilot RCT

Effect of restoration material on marginal bone resorption around modified anatomic zirconia dental implants: A randomised controlled trial

Clinical performance of implant crowns with customized zirconia abutments: A prospective cohort study with a 4.5- to 8.8-year follow-up

Clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes of zirconia and titanium implants in the posterior zone after 1 year of loading-A randomized controlled trial

Navigating Esthetic Challenges: Immediate Implant Placement and Comprehensive Restorative Solutions-A Clinical Case With 2-Year Follow-Up Study

Immediate versus Delayed Implantation for Single-Tooth Restoration of Maxillary Anterior Teeth: A Comparative Analysis on Efficacy

Retrospective, Multi-center, Cohort Study Evaluating Clinical, Technical, Biological, and Esthetic Outcomes of Implant Supported Zirconia Single Crowns Cemented on Titanium-base Abutments: 7-year Mean Follow-up

Peri-implant and esthetic outcomes of cemented and screw-retained crowns using zirconia abutments in single implant-supported restorations-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical and immunological evaluation of peri-implant tissues around ultra-polished and conventionally-polished zirconia abutments. A 1-year follow-up randomized clinical trial

A randomized clinical trial on zirconia versus titanium implants in maxillary single tooth replacement

Comparison of the effect of zirconia and titanium abutments on peri-implant hard and soft tissues