Evaluation of internal and external hexagon connections in immediately loaded full-arch rehabilitations: A within-person randomized split-mouth controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up

Background Although full-arch immediately loaded rehabilitations are widely used nowadays, little information is available on which implant/abutment connection is the most suitable in this type of treatment. Purpose The aim of the present multicentric split-mouth clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of two different implant-abutment connections applied in full-arch immediate loading rehabilitations: external hexagon connection (EHC) versus internal hexagon connection (IHC). Materials and methods Twenty patients were rehabilitated with immediately loaded fixed full-arch rehabilitations. All the implants presented the same macro- and micro-topography but different implant/abutment connection. IHC were used in one randomly selected side of the jaw and EHC in the other side. Outcome measures were implant survival rate, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BoP) evaluated at 3, 6, 12, and 36-month post-loading. Any technical and biological complication was recorded. Kaplan-Meier procedure and linear mixed model were used to perform statistical analysis. Results Forty-three EHC and 40 IHC implants were inserted. No patients dropped out and two implants failed in the first 6 months. The CSR was 97.7% for EHC and 97.5% for IHC implants. No statistically significant differences were found among the two groups for any of the parameters at any time point. At the 36-month follow-up visit a slight difference was found in MBL with a mean value of 1.7 mm in the EHC and of 1.9 mm in the IHC group (p = 0.355). No biologic complications were identified. Seven loosed abutment screws were identified in the entire follow-up period, two in the EHC, and five in the IHC group without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.394). Conclusions After 36 months in function, both internal and external hexagon connections provided good clinical outcomes and were not associated with any significant difference.