Discomfort/pain due to peri‐implant probing at titanium and zirconium implants: A cross‐sectional study
Objective This study was designed to compare discomfort/pain after periodontal and peri‐implant probing in patients with titanium compared with zirconium implants. Methods One examiner recruited and examined 70 patients, each of whom had a dental implant with a contralateral tooth; 37 patients had t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2024-09, Vol.35 (9), p.1081-1090 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
This study was designed to compare discomfort/pain after periodontal and peri‐implant probing in patients with titanium compared with zirconium implants.
Methods
One examiner recruited and examined 70 patients, each of whom had a dental implant with a contralateral tooth; 37 patients had titanium implants of various types and 33 patients had zirconium implants; one implant was analyzed for each patient. Periodontal and peri‐implant probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) were assessed. Immediately after probing, patients rated their discomfort/pain with a visual analog scale (VAS). The emergence profiles of implant crowns were assessed on periapical radiographs of the implants.
Results
Seventy patients with a median age of 55 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 42–65 years), including 43 females and 16 current smokers, were examined. The mean PPD and bleeding on probing (BOP) were higher around implants than around teeth (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0905-7161 1600-0501 1600-0501 |
DOI: | 10.1111/clr.14298 |