Perfection does not exist, nor should it be strived for in such cases. The present outcome may not be the epitome of ideal, but it is certainly good enough. Subjecting the patient to further interventions is unnecessary and counter productive, for it will not produce any truly appreciable difference in the end.
However, having said that, the one thing that I feel will produce an appreciable difference long-term (and in fact would have probably produced a better, faster result in the distal papilla), in the interest of encouraging further natural improvement (growth) of the papillae (specially in the distal one), is a shallower subgingival emergence profile in the final crown in the interproximal areas. The subgingival emergence profile of the present temporary crown, from its cervical margin toward the incisal should be more shallow, or straighter, if you will, allowing more room. The temporary crown is presently grossly overcontoured subgingivally in the interproximal distally, at least according to the x-ray. Note the almost blocky contour in the .5-1mm immediately adjacent to the crown's subgingival cervical margin on the distal. It may sound like I'm nitpicking, but that emergence profile contour is essential. A shallower (i.e. somewhat flatter) distal contour should be adopted in the final crown, so as not to impinge on the papillary space. That distal contour should match more the present mesial contour, which is much better -- point in fact: the mesial papilla has regenerated faster and better.
As for Kevin's suggestion, I shouldn't say it's nonsense because it's not polite, but it's total nonsense. Sorry Kevin, no disrespect meant. Not only is it nonsensical to remove a perfectly integrated implant and subject the patient to unnecessary additional surgery but, there is absolutely no indication, nor space, for extruding the cuspid any further. Not only is the cuspid properly aligned in occlusion as well as within the anterior incisal curve but, if anything, the cuspid next to the implant is erupted even a little more than the other cuspid. The wear facet on the distal incisal of the opposing lower cuspid is a clear giveaway of this. It is also a clear indication that the upper cuspid has nowhere to go and, it is actually a contraindication to extruding this cuspid any further. Doing so will only exacerbate the already existing inter-cuspid occlusal interference, and will also accelerate the attrition of the distal incisal of the lower cuspid.