%0 Journal Article
%T Impact of abutment geometry on early implant marginal bone loss. A double-blind, randomized, 6-month clinical trial.
%A Pérez-Sayans M
%A Castelo-Baz P
%A Penarrocha-Oltra D
%A Seijas-Naya F
%A Conde-Amboage M
%A Somoza-Martín JM
%J Clin Oral Implants Res
%V 33
%N 10
%D Oct 2022
%M 35869615
%F 5.021
%R 10.1111/clr.13985
%X <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of the abutment width on early marginal bone loss (MBL).<BR><B>METHODS: </B>A balanced, randomized, double-blind clinical trial with two parallel experimental arms was conducted without a control group. The arms were "cylindrical" abutment and "concave" abutment. Eighty hexagonal internal connection implants, each with a diameter of 4 × 10 mm, were placed in healed mature bone. The main variable was the peri-implant tissue stability, which was measured as MBL at 8 weeks and 6 months.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>The final sample consisted of 77 implants that were placed in 25 patients. 38 (49.4%) were placed using the cylindrical abutment, and the other 39 (50.6%) were placed using the concave abutment. The early global MBL of -0.6 ± 0.7 mm in the cylindrical abutment group was significantly higher than it was in the concave abutment group, in which the early global MBL was -0.4 ± 0.6 mm (p = .030). The estimated effect size (ES) was negative for the cylindrical abutment (ES = -1.3730, CI -2.5919 to -0.1327; t-value = -2.4893; p = .0139), therefore implying a loss of mean bone level, and it was positive for the concave abutment (ES = 2.8231; CI: 1.4379 to 4.2083; t-value = 4.0957; p = .0002), therefore implying an increase in the average bone level.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>The concave abutments presented significantly less early MBL at 6 months post-loading than classical cylindrical abutments did.