DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Maxillary complete denture and mandibular All-on-4 implant restoration considering maintenance: a case report

유지 관리를 고려한 상악 총의치와 하악 All-on-4 임플란트 보철 수복 증례

  • Kim, So-Yeun (Dental Clinic Center, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Kwon, Eun-Young (Dental Clinic Center, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Jung, Kyoung-Hwa (Dental Clinic Center, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Jeon, Hye-Mi (Dental Clinic Center, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Kang, Eun-Sook (Department of Prosthodontics, In-Je University Haeundae Paik Hospital) ;
  • Yun, Mi-Jung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 김소연 (부산대학교병원 치과진료센터) ;
  • 권은영 (부산대학교병원 치과진료센터) ;
  • 정경화 (부산대학교병원 치과진료센터) ;
  • 전혜미 (부산대학교병원 치과진료센터) ;
  • 강은숙 (인제대학교 해운대백병원 치과보철과) ;
  • 윤미정 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2018.12.18
  • Accepted : 2019.01.21
  • Published : 2019.03.30

Abstract

In the case of edentulous patients, the total amount of occlusal force is dispersed by the keratinized gingiva during mastication, in result, causing lower masticatory and chewing efficiency. In particular, the mandibular area has more side effects such as pain than the maxilla has. It gets worse when the patient has more absorption of alveolar bone, but the implant treatment is often interrupted due to the existence of the inferior alveolar nerve. In this case, a patient treated with the all-on-4 method by placing the implant in the anterior part of mandible and with the conventional complete denture for the maxilla has maintained without complications and was satisfied with the restoration both functionally and esthetically.

무치악 환자의 보철치료에서 총의치를 이용한 보철 치료 시 각화 점막을 통해 교합력을 분담하므로 저작력과 저작 능률이 떨어지고 특히 지지 점막 면적이 작은 하악의 경우 상악에 비해 통증 발생 등의 부작용이 더 많다. 치조골 흡수가 많은 환자일수록 이는 더 심화되나 하악 구치부 측의 하치조신경관의 존재 때문에 임플란트를 동반한 적극적 치료가 어려운 경우가 많다. 이에 본 증례에서는 상악에는 전통적인 총의치를 제작하고 하악은 치조골 높이가 충분한 전방부에만 임플란트를 식립하여 all-on-4 방법으로 치료한 환자에서 좋은 경과를 보여 보고하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Rissin L, House JE, Manly RS, Kapur KK. Clinical comparison of masticatory performance and electromyographic activity of patients with complete dentures, overdentures and natural teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1978;39:508-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(78)80181-4
  2. Wismeijer D, Van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI, Mulder J, Kalk W. Patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures. A comparison of three treatment strategies with ITI-dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;26:263-7.
  3. Kim YJ, Jeong SM, Kim KH, Fang JW, Kim DH, Choi BH. Application of digital implant system on implant treatment with “all-on-4” concept. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2018;56:88-94. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2018.56.1.88
  4. Branemark PI, Svensson B, van Steenberghe D. Ten-year survival rates of fixed prostheses on four or six implants admodum Branemark in full edentulism. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:227-31. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060405.x
  5. Kim KS, Kim YL, Bae JM, Cho HW. Biomechanical comparison of axial and tilted implants for mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:976-84.
  6. Branemark PI, Svensson B, van Steenberghe D. Ten-year survival rates of fixed prostheses on four or six implants admodum Branemark in full edentulism. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:227-31. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060405.x
  7. Tallgren A. The continuing reduction of the residual alveolar ridges in complete denture wearers: a mixed longitudinal study covering 25 years. J Prosthet Dent 1972;27:120-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(72)90188-6
  8. Lang BR, Razzoog ME. Lingualized intergration: tooth molds and an occlusal scheme for edentulous implant patients. Implant Dent 1992;1:204-11. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199200130-00007
  9. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  10. Narhi TO, Geertman ME, Hevinga M, Abdo H, Kalk W. Changes in the edentulous maxilla in persons wearing implant-retained mandibular overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:43-9. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.107113
  11. Chung CH, Son MK. The classification and comparison of implant prosthesis according to types of retention. Part I: screw retained prosthesis vs cement retained prosthesis. J Korean Acad Oral Maxillofac Implantology 2010;14:138-51.
  12. Misch CE. Dental implant prosthetics. 1st ed. St. Louis; Mosby; 2004. p. 414-6.
  13. Schuyler CH. Full denture service as influenced by tooth forms and materials. J Prosthet Dent 1951;1:33-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(51)90077-7