Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42322345

Influence of Concave Versus Convex Emergence Profiles on Midfacial Mucosal Stability-A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the influence of concave versus convex emergence profiles on midfacial mucosal stability in partially edentulous patients restored with implant-supported single restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251139042). An electronic search in MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase was performed up to May 7, 2026. Eligible studies included RCTs comparing concave (test group) and convex (control group) transmucosal prosthetic designs and reporting midfacial mucosal level changes (mm). Data extraction and risk of bias assessment (RoB 2) were performed independently. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using weighted mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings. RESULTS: Four RCTs including 144 implants with a 12-month follow-up were included. Of these, 128 implants contributed to the quantitative synthesis, with 66 implants allocated to the concave/modified emergence profile group and 62 implants allocated to the convex/non-concave emergence profile group. The pooled analysis demonstrated a mean difference of -0.31 mm (95% CI -0.63 to 0.02; p = 0.064), indicating a trend toward greater midfacial mucosal recession with convex emergence profiles compared with concave designs. Between-study heterogeneity was low to moderate (I2 = 28%), suggesting consistent findings across studies. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the direction of the effect, with pooled estimates ranging from -0.12 to -0.43 mm. Exclusion of one study resulted in a statistically significant difference favoring concave emergence profiles (-0.43 mm; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.16; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Convex emergence profiles are associated with a tendency toward increased midfacial mucosal recession. Concave profiles are preferable to support peri-implant soft-tissue stability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Emergence profile design should be considered an integral component of prosthetic and surgical planning. The use of concave transmucosal contours during provisionalization and definitive restoration may contribute to improved peri-implant soft tissue stability and enhanced esthetic outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Miha Pirc, Priscilla Balzarini, Jonathan Esquivel, Anina N Zuercher, Ronald E Jung, Franz J Strauss. 2026-06-20. Influence of Concave Versus Convex Emergence Profiles on Midfacial Mucosal Stability-A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.70210

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Clinical accuracy and short-term outcomes of intraoral photogrammetry for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: A retrospective multicentre study on 35 patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical accuracy and short-term outcomes of complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (ISFDPs) fabricated using an intraoral photogrammetry (IPG) based digital workflow in completely edentulous patients. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective clinical study included 35 patients rehabilitated with 52 complete-arch ISFDPs (10 FP1, 18 FP2 and 24 FP3 restorations) supported by 221 implants. All definitive prostheses were designed and fabricated using a fully digital workflow initiated by IPG acquisition with the Aoralscan Elite IPG® (SHINING 3D). The primary outcome was clinical accuracy, assessed at definitive prosthesis delivery through evaluation of passive fit using the Sheffield test and radiographic verification. Secondary outcomes included biologic and prosthetic complications, as well as implant and prosthesis survival rates during the follow-up. RESULTS: Passive fit was achieved in all definitive restorations (100%). Radiographic evaluation confirmed accurate marginal adaptation at the implant-prosthesis interface in all cases. No statistically significant differences in clinical accuracy were observed according to treated arch, number of supporting implants, or prosthetic design (P > .05). During a mean follow-up period of 12.1 ± 3.5 months, biologic and prosthetic complications were limited and generally minor. Implant survival was 99.5%, and prosthesis survival was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this retrospective clinical study, the IPG based workflow demonstrated high clinical accuracy and predictable short-term outcomes for complete-arch implant rehabilitation, consistently enabling passive fit and favorable prosthetic performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: IPG may represent a clinically reliable and predictable approach for complete-arch digital implant impression acquisition. The high rates of passive fit, together with the low incidence of biologic and prosthetic complications observed in this multicenter clinical study, support the use of IPG based workflows for the fabrication of complete-arch ISFDPs.

Humans

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between intraoral scanning and conventional impressions for complete-arch implant prostheses: a pilot RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To compare framework passive fit, subjective evaluations, and short-term clinical outcomes between conventional impressions (CI) and intraoral scanning (IOS) for complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (CIFDPs). METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 22 patients were allocated to the CI or IOS groups. All participants received a definitive one-piece CIFDP. The primary outcome was framework passive fit, assessed using the Vision and Tactile Score (V&T score), which included framework lift-off, the single-screw test, the full-screw test, smoothness of screw insertion, and radiographic gap assessment. Secondary outcomes included operator evaluation, patient satisfaction using a visual analog scale (VAS), early implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), modified Plaque Index (mPII), and complications at the 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled (CI: n = 11; IOS: n = 11), and one patient in the CI group was lost to follow-up. No statistically significant difference in the V&T score was observed between the CI and IOS groups (4.66 &#xb1; 0.17 vs. 4.65 &#xb1; 0.28; P = 0.93). The operator reported greater nervousness during the CI procedure than during IOS (21.82 &#xb1; 15.69 vs. 8.64 &#xb1; 7.47; P < 0.05). Patients in the CI group reported significantly greater discomfort, including nausea and anxiety, than those in the IOS group (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, the early implant survival rate was 100% in both groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in MBL (0.09 &#xb1; 0.09 vs. 0.06 &#xb1; 0.10 mm; P = 0.43) or mPII (0.10 &#xb1; 0.12 vs. 0.10 &#xb1; 0.28; P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: IOS and CI achieved comparable short-term clinical outcomes in patients who met the predefined inclusion criteria, including controlled implant number, spacing, and angulation. IOS provided a more favorable experience for both operators and patients. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In complete-arch implant restorations, intraoral scanning may provide clinical outcomes comparable to those of conventional impressions while improving patient comfort.

Humans

Soft Tissue Volume Augmentation at Single Implant Sites Applying Collagen Matrices or Connective Tissue Grafts: 10-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

AIM: To compare up to 10&#x2009;years clinical, profilometric and patient-reported outcomes of implant sites previously augmented using a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) or connective tissue graft (SCTG) in the aesthetic zone. METHODS: The original non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (RCT) enrolled 20 patients who received soft tissue volume augmentation with VCMX or SCTG at single implant sites. Clinical assessments and standardized measurements were performed at baseline after crown insertion and at 6&#x2009;months, 1, 3, 5, 7.5, and 10&#x2009;years. The primary outcome was mucosal thickness. Secondary outcomes included marginal bone levels (MBL), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque control record, Pink Aesthetic Score (PES), OHIP-14 and buccal profilometric changes. Group comparisons were performed using mixed-effects and generalized estimating equation (GEE) models, which account for within-patient correlations due to repeated measurements and allow inclusion of all available data without requiring imputation for missing observations. RESULTS: Of the 20 originally enrolled patients, 10 (5 in the SCTG group and 5 in the VCMX group) were available for re-examination at 10&#x2009;years. The adjusted between-group difference in mucosal thickness was -0.02&#x2009;mm (95% CI -0.99 to 0.96). As the lower bound of the confidence interval remained above the prespecified non-inferiority margin of -1&#x2009;mm, non-inferiority of VCMX was shown. Buccal contour changes were comparable during the early follow-up, while a trend toward a greater long-term contour decrease was observed in group VCMX (-0.31&#x2009;mm [95% CI, -0.65 to 0.03]; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.07). Mean PES values were 10.6 in the SCTG group and 9.6 in the VCMX group, with no significant between-group differences (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.45). Both groups revealed high levels of oral health-related quality of life, with low median OHIP-14 scores (SCTG, 0.0; VCMX, 1.0; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.26). CONCLUSION: These preliminary long-term findings showed no clinically relevant differences between SCTG and VCMX in terms of clinical, profilometric and patient-reported outcomes. While SCTG remains the reference standard, VCMX represents a less invasive alternative but with a slight tendency toward greater long-term contour reduction. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Volume-stable collagen matrices serve as a viable alternative to autogenous connective tissue grafts for peri-implant soft tissue volume augmentation, particularly in patients seeking a reduced morbidity, without compromising long-term clinical or aesthetic outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00017484.

Humans