A Comparative Study Between Hybrid Abutments and Standard Abutments in Implant-Supported Prosthesis: A Split-Mouth Clinical Trial

Background Implant-supported prostheses are widely used to replace extracted teeth. Therefore, studies on abutments’ designs, shapes, and benefits had increased in recent years, as the design of the standard abutment still poses many problems in periodontal and cosmetic aspects. So, could the hybrid abutment solve some of these problems? Aim We aim to conduct a clinical comparison between standard and hybrid abutments in terms of the state of peri-implant gingival tissues and patients’ aesthetic and functional satisfaction after the cementation of the final prostheses. Material and methods The study sample consisted of 10 patients, with 20 dental implants. Each patient received two implants as a standard abutment was placed over one implant and a hybrid abutment was placed over the other. Clinical assessment of the peri-implant gingival tissue and patients’ aesthetic and functional satisfaction was performed (immediately, three months, six months, and one year) after the cementation of the final prostheses. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to detect statistically significant differences between groups. Results The percentage of the thick gingival biotype was 80%, and the percentage of the thin gingival biotype was 20% in each group during the follow-up periods. In addition, all papilla fill the whole interdental space in all samples of the two groups after six months and one year. Finally, there were no significant differences in patients’ aesthetic satisfaction between groups during one year of follow-up (P = 0.631), and there were no significant differences in patients’ functional satisfaction between groups during one year of follow-up (P = 0.684). Conclusion Within the limitations of the current work, there are no differences between standard and hybrid abutments in terms of affecting the peri-implant gingival tissue and patients’ aesthetic and functional satisfaction.