We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Prosthodontics



Forgotten password?


Int J Prosthodont 33 (2020), No. 1     23. Dec. 2019
Int J Prosthodont 33 (2020), No. 1  (23.12.2019)

Page 29-38, doi:10.11607/ijp.6205, PubMed:31860911

Comparison of Peri-implant Soft Tissue Color with the Use of Pink-Neck vs Gray Implants and Abutments Based on Soft Tissue Thickness: A 6-Month Follow-up Study
Bittner, Nurit / Schulze-Späte, Ulrike / Cleber, Silva / Da Silva, John D. / Kim, David M. / Tarnow, Dennis / Ishikawa-Nagai, Shigemi / Gil, Mindy S.
Purpose: To compare the optical effects of an immediately placed anodized pink-neck implant and abutment vs a conventional gray implant and abutment in relation to soft tissue thickness 6 months after the restoration was completed.
Materials and Methods: Forty patients with a hopeless maxillary anterior tooth received an immediate implant and an immediate provisional or custom healing abutment after flapless extraction. Participants were randomized to receive either a conventional titanium implant (control) or a pink-neck implant (test). All patients then received two identical CAD/CAM titanium abutments (one conventional gray, delivered first, and one anodized to appear pink, delivered 3 weeks after) and a zirconia crown. A spectrophotometer was used to record the color of the peri-implant mucosa and gingiva 3 weeks after delivery of each abutment and 6 months after the final restoration was delivered. The color difference between the two sites was calculated (ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*), and correlations with soft tissue thickness, change in ridge dimension, and implant position were assessed.
Results: Irrespective of the randomization group, changing the abutments from gray to pink showed a change in color between the peri-implant mucosa and the natural gingiva. Patients with a thin gingival biotype showed a statistically significant color change (P = .00089) in the a* axis, meaning that the gingiva appeared more pink (Δa*). No significant correlation between the soft tissue color and buccolingual collapse, vertical recession, or implant position was observed in either group.
Conclusion: The difference in color observed between the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva was considerable in all groups. Anodized pink implants and abutments could reduce the difference in the red aspect (Δa*) of the peri-implant mucosa compared to the adjacent gingiva in patients with a thin biotype.