Clinical Evaluation of Pink Esthetic Score of Immediately Impressed Posterior Dental Implants.

PURPOSE: While comparative outcome results for peri-implant crestal bone levels, mucosal margin position, and peri-implant indices have been reported, no studies are available that evaluate and compare the esthetic result of impressions performed immediately at implant placement with that of impressions performed on healed implants. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the pink esthetic score of posterior implants restored with an immediate impression workflow compared to implants restored with a delayed impression workflow. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-eight eligible participants who had received a single implant crown either in the premolar or molar regions at least 4 months before the study, were identified by an electronic health record review and scheduled for a single-visit study appointment. Esthetic outcomes were measured using the pink esthetic score. Several local- and prosthesis-related factors were recorded and their association with the selected outcome was assessed. Two-sample t-test was used for comparisons between the groups. RESULTS: Pink esthetic score ranged between 4 and 12 (mean: 8). No significant difference between immediate (8.36 ±1.12) and delayed (7.76 ±2.14) impression workflow groups were seen for the total PES (p = 0.25). In addition, individual comparisons between immediately and delayed impressed implants for mesial papilla (1.27 ±0.47; 0.88 ±0.78), distal papilla (0.73 ±0.65; 0.76 ±0.83), tissue margin (1.73 ±0.47; 1.47 ±0.51), tissue contour (1.27 ±0.65; 0.82 ±0.64), alveolar process (0.82 ±0.60; 1.00 ±0.87), color (1.27 ±0.65; 1.29 ±0.69), and texture (1.36 ±0.50; 1.53 ±0.62) did not show significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that the pink esthetic score is not significantly different between single posterior implants impressed with immediate and delayed implant workflows.