Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sealing the peri-implant tissue is a determining factor for long-term implant survival. In the transmucosal region, the cervical fraction of the prosthetic crown is in contact with these tissues, so mucointegration will also be influenced by the biomaterial used for the prosthetic restoration. This study aims to compare the tissue response generated by definitive restorative materials and polymeric materials from a histological point of view. METHODS: This study performed an observational prospective cohort study in which biopsies of the peri-implant mucosa were taken after placement of implant-supported prosthetic restorations made of different materials (zirconium oxide, lithium disilicate, and PMMA). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed in the increase in the thickness of the non-keratinized epithelium when comparing the definitive materials (zirconium oxide/lithium disilicate) vs. the provisional material (PMMA) and in the number of collagen fibers when comparing zirconium oxide and lithium disilicate. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that zirconia is the material that presents the most adequate biological response of peri-implant tissues. It shows a lower intensity of inflammatory cellular content, a total normality in the number of collagen fibers (the arrangement of the fibers is normal in 90% of the cases), and vascular proliferation of connective tissue in 83% of the cases. These parameters make it a material with a predictable response. Similarly, only the following slight statistically significant differences between the definitive and provisional materials are observed, indicating that the biological response generated by the provisional material (PMMA) is not very different from that obtained with the placement of the definitive restoration.