The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of adjacent tooth displacement in the posterior implant restoration with proximal contact loss by superimposition of digital models

  • Jo, Deuk-Won (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kwon, Min-Jung (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Jong-Hee (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Young-Kyun (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yi, Yang-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2018.09.12
  • Accepted : 2019.04.17
  • Published : 2019.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This study was conducted to investigate patterns of adjacent tooth displacement in the posterior implant with interproximal contact loss (ICL) by 3-D digital superimposition method. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Posterior partially edentulous patients, restored with implant fixed partial prostheses before 2011 and suffered from food impaction of ICL between 2009 and 2011, were included. Two dental casts, at the time of delivery and at the time of food impaction in a same patient, was converted into 3-D digital models through scanning and superimposition was performed to assess chronologic changes of the dentition. Directions of tooth displacement were evaluated and the amount of ICL was calculated. Correlations between the amount of ICL and elapsed time, or between the amount of ICL and age after function, were assessed at a significance level of P<.05. RESULTS. A total number of 13 patients (8 males, 5 females) with a mean age of $65.76{\pm}9.94years$ and 17 areas (4 maxillae, 13 mandibles) were included in this retrospective study. Teeth adjacent to the implant restoration showed complex displacements but characteristic tendency according to the location of the arch. The mean amount of ICL was $0.33{\pm}0.14mm$. Elapsed time from function to ICL was $61.47{\pm}31.27months$. There were no significant differences between the amount of ICL and elapsed time, or age (P>.05). CONCLUSION. Natural teeth showed various directional movements to result in occlusal change in the arch. The 3-D superimposition of chronologic digital models was a helpful method to analyze the changes of dentition and individual tooth displacement adjacent to implant restoration.

Keywords

References

  1. Blanes RJ, Bernard JP, Blanes ZM, Belser UC. A 10-year prospective study of ITI dental implants placed in the posterior region. II: Influence of the crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic treatment modalities on crestal bone loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:707-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01307.x
  2. Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi K, Linden U, Bergstrom C, van Steenberghe D. Survival of the Branemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: a 10-year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:639-45.
  3. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Duyck J, Quirynen M, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. part I: a longitudinal clinical evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:381-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130406.x
  4. Goodacre CJ, Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K. Clinical complications of osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:537-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70208-8
  5. Gothberg C, Bergendal T, Magnusson T. Complications after treatment with implant-supported fixed prostheses: a retrospective study. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:201-7.
  6. Kim Y, Oh TJ, Misch CE, Wang HL. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:26-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01067.x
  7. Pjetursson BE, Lang NP. Prosthetic treatment planning on the basis of scientific evidence. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:72-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01824.x
  8. Wei H, Tomotake Y, Nagao K, Ichikawa T. Implant prostheses and adjacent tooth migration: preliminary retrospective survey using 3-dimensional occlusal analysis. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:302-4.
  9. Koori H, Morimoto K, Tsukiyama Y, Koyano K. Statistical analysis of the diachronic loss of interproximal contact between fixed implant prostheses and adjacent teeth. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:535-40.
  10. Byun SJ, Heo SM, Ahn SG, Chang M. Analysis of proximal contact loss between implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and adjacent teeth in relation to influential factors and effects. A cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:709-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12373
  11. Varthis S, Randi A, Tarnow DP. Prevalence of interproximal open contacts between single-implant restorations and adjacent teeth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2016;31:1089-92. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4432
  12. Varthis S, Tarnow DP, Randi A. Interproximal open contacts between implant restorations and adjacent teeth. Prevalence - causes - possible solutions. J Prosthodont 2019;28:e806-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12980
  13. Downs M. Mesial drift. Angle Orthod 1938;8:77-99.
  14. Trauner F. The causes of progressive movement of the teeth toward the front. Am Orthod 1912;3:144-58.
  15. Wolpoff MH. Interstitial wear. Am J Phys Anthropol 1971;34:205-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330340206
  16. Southard TE, Behrents RG, Tolley EA. The anterior component of occlusal force. Part 1. Measurement and distribution. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;96:493-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(89)90116-9
  17. Herber RP, Fong J, Lucas SA, Ho SP. Imaging an adapted dentoalveolar complex. Anat Res Int 2012;2012:782571. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/782571
  18. Ten Cate AR, Deporter DA, Freeman E. The role of fibroblasts in the remodeling of periodontal ligament during physiologic tooth movement. Am J Orthod 1976;69:155-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(76)90194-9
  19. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. 5th ed. St. Louis; Mosby Elsevier; 2014. p. 278.
  20. Thilander B, Odman J, Jemt T. Single implants in the upper incisor region and their relationship to the adjacent teeth. An 8-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:346-55. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100502.x
  21. Jemt T. Measurements of tooth movements in relation to single-implant restorations during 16 years: a case report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:200-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00065.x
  22. Roberts WE, Smith RK, Zilberman Y, Mozsary PG, Smith RS. Osseous adaptation to continuous loading of rigid endosseous implants. Am J Orthod 1984;86:95-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90301-4
  23. Bernard JP, Schatz JP, Christou P, Belser U, Kiliaridis S. Longterm vertical changes of the anterior maxillary teeth adjacent to single implants in young and mature adults. A retrospective study. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:1024-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00574.x
  24. Cha BK, Lee JY, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Yoshida N. Analysis of tooth movement in extraction cases using three-dimensional reverse engineering technology. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:325-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm019
  25. Hoggan BR, Sadowsky C. The use of palatal rugae for the assessment of anteroposterior tooth movements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:482-8. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.113001
  26. Choi JI, Cha BK, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Choi DS, Jang IS. Validity of palatal superimposition of 3-dimensional digital models in cases treated with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:235-41. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.235
  27. Bishara SE, Treder JE, Jakobsen JR. Facial and dental changes in adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;106:175-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70036-2
  28. Kaplan P. Drifting, tipping, supraeruption, and segmental alveolar bone growth. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:280-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90305-1
  29. Craddock HL. Occlusal changes following posterior tooth loss in adults. Part 3. A study of clinical parameters associated with the presence of occlusal interferences following posterior tooth loss. J Prosthodont 2008;17:25-30.
  30. Ito H, Okimoto K, Mizumori T, Terada Y, Maruyama T. A clinical study of the relationship between occlusal curvature and craniomandibular disorders. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:78-82.
  31. Sakaguchi K, Uehara S, Yagi T, Miyawaki S. Relationship between occlusal curvatures and bite force in humans. Orthod Wave 2012;71:79-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.odw.2012.02.001
  32. Brunsvold MA. Pathologic tooth migration. J Periodontol 2005;76:859-66. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.6.859
  33. Pang NS, Suh CS, Kim KD, Park W, Jung BY. Prevalence of proximal contact loss between implant-supported fixed prostheses and adjacent natural teeth and its associated factors: a 7-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:1501-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13018
  34. Carter GA, McNamara JA Jr. Longitudinal dental arch changes in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114:88-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70243-4
  35. Harris EF. A longitudinal study of arch size and form in untreated adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:419-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(97)80024-8
  36. Sinclair PM, Little RM. Maturation of untreated normal occlusions. Am J Orthod 1983;83:114-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(83)90296-8
  37. Wong AT, Wat PY, Pow EH, Leung KC. Proximal contact loss between implant-supported prostheses and adjacent natural teeth: a retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:e68-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12353
  38. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 2004;74:298-303.
  39. Mullen SR1, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:346-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.044
  40. Miller RJ, Kuo E, Choi W. Validation of Align Technology's Treat III digital model superimposition tool and its case application. Orthod Craniofac Res 2003;6:143-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0544.2003.247.x

Cited by

  1. Clinical evaluation of sectional matrix versus circumferential matrix for reproduction of proximal contact by undergraduate students and postgraduate dentists: A randomized controlled trial vol.13, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.4103/jioh.jioh_303_20