Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Periodontal Response to Different Prosthetic Margin Design
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Gingival Recession
- Sponsor
- University of Padova, School of Dental Medicine
- Enrollment
- 58
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Periodontal Probing Depth (PPD)
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 11 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
Background: The actual literature is consistent in considering potential negative effects of sub-gingival prosthetic margins on the periodontal health, but no research has focused the attention on the type of prosthetic margin designs. Hence, the aim of the present study is to evaluate if a horizontal finishing line (deep chamfer preparation) may have a different influence on periodontal soft tissue in comparison with a vertical finishing line (feather edge preparation).
Methods: A prospective randomized controlled double blind clinical trial with one single operator and three experienced examiners was performed. One hundred and six crowns were prepared with horizontal tooth preparation while ninety-four with vertical tooth preparation. All the margins were positioned within the periodontal sulcus, at 0.5mm sub-gingivally and all the all-ceramic restorations were cemented with resin cement. Periodontal Probing Depth (PPD), Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI) and Gingival Bleeding on Probing (BOP) were recorded prior to tooth preparation and twelve month after crown cementation. Also, at 12 months follow-up, the gingival margin position was related to the crown margin position.
Investigators
Eriberto Bressan
Chairman, Department of Periodontology
University of Padova, School of Dental Medicine
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •The patient inclusion criteria were as follows:
- •dentate patients treatment planned for single unit restorations in the esthetic zone (from 1st premolar forward)
- •periodontal probing depth prior to tooth preparation ≤4mm, with no bleeding on probing and no plaque
- •\>30 years of age
- •full mouth plaque score (FMPS) and full mouth bleeding scores (FMBS) \<20% at study baseline
- •eventual loss of attachment limited only to areas different from the sites included in the study.
- •The patient exclusion criteria were as follows:
- •patient with medical history in which any dental intervention would be contraindicated
- •any local or systemic disease, condition or medication that might compromise healing and affect the periodontium
- •dental caries or periodontal disease in the remaining teeth
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Periodontal Probing Depth (PPD)
Time Frame: Change from Baseline Periodontal Probing Depth (PPD) at 12 months post intervention
Periodontal Probing Depth (PPD) measured at three different facial sites (mesial, facial, distal), with the utilization of a periodontal probe (UNC periodontal probe, Hu-Friedy, Chicago, IL) recording the measurements to the nearest millimeter.
Plaque Index (PI)
Time Frame: Change from Baseline Plaque Index at 12 months post intervention
Plaque Index (PI), according to Silness \& Loe
Gingival Index (GI)
Time Frame: Change from Baseline Gingival Index (GI) at 12 months post intervention
Gingival Index (GI), according to Silness \& Loe
Bleeding on Probing (BOP)
Time Frame: Change from Baseline Bleeding on Probing (BOP) at 12 months post intervention
Bleeding on Probing (BOP), according to Ainamo \& Bay (presence or absence)
Gingival recession (GR)
Time Frame: Change from Baseline Gingival recession (GR) at 12 months post intervention
Gingival margin position related to the crown margin