Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2011 Dec;41(6):302-8.
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2011.41.6.302. Epub 2011 Dec 31.

Gingival recontouring by provisional implant restoration for optimal emergence profile: report of two cases

Mee-Kyoung Son  1 , Hyun-Seon Jang
Affiliations
Case Reports

Gingival recontouring by provisional implant restoration for optimal emergence profile: report of two cases

Mee-Kyoung Son et al. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2011 Dec.

Abstract

Purpose: The emergence profile concept of an implant restoration is one of the most important factors for the esthetics and health of peri-implant soft tissue. This paper reports on two cases of gingival recontouring by the fabrication of a provisional implant restoration to produce an optimal emergence profile of a definitive implant restoration.

Methods: After the second surgery, a preliminary impression was taken to make a soft tissue working cast. A provisional crown was fabricated on the model. The soft tissue around the implant fixture on the model was trimmed with a laboratory scalpel to produce the scalloped gingival form. Light curing composite resin was added to fill the space between the provisional crown base and trimmed gingiva. After 4 to 6 weeks, the final impression was taken to make a definitive implant restoration, where the soft tissue and tooth form were in harmony with the adjacent tooth.

Results: At the first insertion of the provisional restoration, gum bleaching revealed gingival pressure. Four to six weeks after placing the provisional restoration, the gum reformed with harmony between the peri-implant gingiva and adjacent dentition.

Conclusions: Gingival recontouring with a provisional implant restoration is a non-surgical and non-procedure-sensitive method. The implant restoration with the optimal emergence profile is expected to provide superior esthetic and functional results.

Keywords: Dental implants; Dental restoration repair; Gingiva.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The maxillary first premolar was extracted and the implant was placed (A, before extraction; B, implant healed in a semi-submerged manner).
Figure 2
Figure 2
4 mm solid abutment placed.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Provisional restoration with an improper tooth contour.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Provisional restoration with a proper crown contour (A). Composite resin added extraorally to create an appropriate emergence profile (B).
Figure 5
Figure 5
The provisional restoration was placed.
Figure 6
Figure 6
An impression was taken when the change in the gingival tissue architecture was evident after 1 month of provisionalization.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Definitive implant restoration (A). Postoperative facial view of the harmonious gingival tissue complex and adjacent dentition (B).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Initial X-ray before extraction of the upper right central incisor (A). The initial image showed the original diastema between the incisors. Immediate implant placement with guided bone regeneration after extraction (B).
Figure 9
Figure 9
The maxillary left central incisor was replaced with an implant (A). Impression coping was placed to make the impression (B).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Occlusal view of soft tissue cast. Flat and bulky mesial interdental papilla existed between the incisors in the original diastema.
Figure 11
Figure 11
A temporary abutment was connected to produce the screw-retained provisional restoration.
Figure 12
Figure 12
To make a triangular formed interdental papilla and proper contoured crown, composite resin was added to the mesial base of the provisional restoration.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Provisional restoration with a natural emergence profile (A). Provisional restoration was placed for 1 month to reform the gingiva (B).
Figure 14
Figure 14
Recontoured gingival architecture by a provisional restoration.
Figure 15
Figure 15
Postoperative facial view.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Andersson B, Odman P, Lindvall AM, Lithner B. Single-tooth restorations supported by osseointegrated implants: results and experiences from a prospective study after 2 to 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10:702–711. - PubMed
    1. Avivi-Arber L, Zarb GA. Clinical effectiveness of implant-supported single-tooth replacement: the Toronto Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11:311–321. - PubMed
    1. Jemt T, Pettersson P. A 3-year follow-up study on single implant treatment. J Dent. 1993;21:203–208. - PubMed
    1. Priest GF. Failure rates of restorations for single-tooth replacement. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9:38–45. - PubMed
    1. Levine RA. Soft tissue considerations for optimizing implant esthetics. Funct Esthet Restor Dent. 2007;1:54–62.

Publication types