Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the gingival discoloration of implant supported all-ceramic and Porcelain-Fused-to-Metal (PFM) restorations in anterior maxillary region by spectrophotometric evaluation.
METHODS: Eighteen patients with 29 implant-supported single crowns (11 all-ceramic restorations, 9 PFM restorations with titanium abutment and 9 PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment) in anterior maxillary area were recruited. The color difference between peri-implant gingival and contra-lateral/neighboring tooth mucosa were assessed using a spectrophotometer in CIELab coordinates. Subjective gingival discoloration scores were evaluated by clinician. SPSS17.0 was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the all-ceramic group (3.4+1.8) and PFM group (4.9+3.4) spectrophotometrically. No significant difference was found between the all-ceramic restorations and PFM restorations with titanium abutment (3.5+2.5) as regard to spectrophotometric evaluation of gingival discoloration, and no significant difference was found between the PFM restorations with titanium abutment and PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment (6.3+3.8) either. There was, however, significant difference between the all-ceramic restorations and PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment (p=.037). There was no significant difference between the all-ceramic group and PFM group regarding the clinical gingival discoloration score (GDS) and the gingival discoloration score was tested to have significant correlation with the spectrophotometric evaluation (rs=.426, p=.021).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between all-ceramic group and PFM group as regard to both spectrophothometric and clinical evaluation of gingival discoloration,but the the the PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment induced significantly higher discoloration than all-ceramic restorations.
METHODS: Eighteen patients with 29 implant-supported single crowns (11 all-ceramic restorations, 9 PFM restorations with titanium abutment and 9 PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment) in anterior maxillary area were recruited. The color difference between peri-implant gingival and contra-lateral/neighboring tooth mucosa were assessed using a spectrophotometer in CIELab coordinates. Subjective gingival discoloration scores were evaluated by clinician. SPSS17.0 was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the all-ceramic group (3.4+1.8) and PFM group (4.9+3.4) spectrophotometrically. No significant difference was found between the all-ceramic restorations and PFM restorations with titanium abutment (3.5+2.5) as regard to spectrophotometric evaluation of gingival discoloration, and no significant difference was found between the PFM restorations with titanium abutment and PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment (6.3+3.8) either. There was, however, significant difference between the all-ceramic restorations and PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment (p=.037). There was no significant difference between the all-ceramic group and PFM group regarding the clinical gingival discoloration score (GDS) and the gingival discoloration score was tested to have significant correlation with the spectrophotometric evaluation (rs=.426, p=.021).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between all-ceramic group and PFM group as regard to both spectrophothometric and clinical evaluation of gingival discoloration,but the the the PFM restorations with gold alloy abutment induced significantly higher discoloration than all-ceramic restorations.
| Original language | Multiple languages |
|---|---|
| Journal | Huaxi Kouqiang Yixue Zazhi |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Pages (from-to) | 219-23 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| ISSN | 1000-1182 |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2013 |
Keywords
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences
- Oral Implantology
- Prosthetic