Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Biologic Width around one- and two-piece titanium implants.

J S Hermann1, D Buser, R K Schenk

  • 1Department of Periodontics, Dental School, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA. hermann@zzmk.unizh.ch

Clinical Oral Implants Research
|December 12, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Time on task and task load in visual inspection: A four-month field study with X-ray baggage screeners.

Applied ergonomics·2023
Same author

Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Use: National Dental PBRN Results.

JDR clinical and translational research·2019
Same author

Effectiveness of Contour Augmentation with Guided Bone Regeneration: 10-Year Results.

Journal of dental research·2017
Same author

A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating rh-FGF-2/β-TCP in Periodontal Defects.

Journal of dental research·2016
Same author

Soft Tissue Alterations in Esthetic Postextraction Sites: A 3-Dimensional Analysis.

Journal of dental research·2015
Same author

Thermal processing of bone: in vitro response of mesenchymal cells to bone-conditioned medium.

International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery·2015
Same journal

Evaluation of the Adjunctive Use of Er:YAG Laser or Erythritol Air-Polishing in the Non-Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Pilot RCT.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
Same journal

A 3-Year Split-Mouth Randomized Non-Inferiority Controlled Trial Comparing Cement-Retained Monolithic CAD-CAM Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate Crowns for Single Posterior Implant Restorations.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
Same journal

Block Versus Particulate Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral for Guided Bone Regeneration of Peri-Implant Dehiscence Defects: A 5-Year Randomized Controlled Trial.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
Same journal

Adjunctive Electrolytic Implant Surface Decontamination in the Reconstructive Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis-A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
Same journal

A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing a One-Piece Zirconia Tissue-Level Implant and Two-Piece Titanium Bone-Level Implant for Maxillary Single Tooth Replacement-3 year Results.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
Same journal

Effect of Implant Design on Fracture Resistance, Mode, and Crystal Structure of One- and Two-Piece Zirconia Implants With Ceramic or Titanium Abutment Screws: An In Vitro Study.

Clinical oral implants research·2026
See all related articles

One-piece implants with a rough/smooth border at the bone crest show a smaller biologic width (BW) and more coronal gingival margin (GM). These findings suggest one-piece implants may offer more natural gingival esthetics compared to two-piece implants.

Area of Science:

  • Dental Implantology
  • Periodontology
  • Biomaterials Science

Background:

  • Gingival esthetics depend on healthy periodontal soft tissues, known as Biologic Width (BW).
  • Factors influencing peri-implant soft and hard tissue reactions around endosseous implants are not fully understood.
  • Understanding peri-implant tissue response is crucial for successful implant esthetics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To histometrically examine peri-implant soft tissue dimensions.
  • To evaluate the influence of implant component placement (rough/smooth border or microgap) relative to bone crest.
  • To compare one-piece vs. two-piece implants (submerged vs. nonsubmerged techniques).

Main Methods:

  • Histometric analysis of 59 implants in foxhound mandibles.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of one-piece implants vs. two-piece implants (submerged/nonsubmerged).
  • Evaluation of implant component placement (at, below, or above bone crest).

    • Main Results:

    • One-piece implants with the rough/smooth border at bone crest had significantly smaller Biologic Width (BW) (P<0.05).
    • One-piece implants showed a significantly more coronal gingival margin (GM) (P<0.005) compared to two-piece implants.
    • BW dimensions around one-piece implants were more similar to natural teeth.

    Conclusions:

    • Nonsubmerged one-piece implants may achieve more coronal gingival margins (GM) and favorable Biologic Width (BW) dimensions.
    • Peri-implant soft tissue dimensions differ between one-piece and two-piece implant designs.
    • Findings suggest one-piece implants may offer improved gingival esthetics compared to two-piece implants.