Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 22, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Association between Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Health and Different Prosthetic Emergence Angles in Esthetic Areas:
Diego Lops1, Eugenio Romeo1, Stefano Calza2
1Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, 20100 Milan, Italy.
Background:
The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess peri-implant soft tissue health for implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles.
Methods:
Patients were treated with implants supporting fixed dentures and were followed for 3 years. Buccal emergence angle (EA) measured at 3 years of follow-up visits (t1) were calculated for two different groups: Group 1 (153 implants) for restorations with angle between implant axis and prosthetic emergence angle from ≥30°, and Group 2 (67 implants) for those with angle ≤30°, respectively. Image J software was used for the measurements. Moreover, peri-implant soft tissue parameters such as pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) were assessed, respectively.
Results:
A total of 57 patients were included in the analysis and a total of 220 implants were examined. Mean (±SD) EA in Groups 1 and 2 was 46.4 ± 12.2 and 24.5 ± 4.7 degrees, respectively. After 3 years of follow-up, a PPD difference of 0.062 mm (CI95% -0.041 mm; 0.164 mm) was calculated between the two groups and was not statistically significant (p = 0.238). Similar results were found for PI (OR = 0.78, CI95% 0.31; 1.98, p = 0.599). Furthermore, GI scores of 2 and 3 were found for nine implants (5.9%) in Group 1, and for five implants in Group 2 (7.5%). A non-significant difference (p = 0.76) was found.
Conclusions:
Peri-implant soft-tissue health does not seem to be influenced by EA itself, when a proper emergence profile is provided for implant-supported reconstructions in anterior areas.
