• Title/Summary/Keyword: Mandibular anterior partial edentulous areas

Search Result 4, Processing Time 0.022 seconds

Zirconia removable prosthesis using a milled bar in patient with mandible anterior edentulous area with severe alveolar bone resorption: a case report (치조골 흡수가 심한 하악 전치부 부분 무치악 환자에서 Milled-bar를 이용한 지르코니아 가철성 보철물 수복 증례)

  • Jin-Young Park;Chang-Mo Jeong;Mi-Jung Yun;Jung-Bo Huh;So-Hyoun Lee;Dae-Sung Kim
    • The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    • /
    • v.62 no.3
    • /
    • pp.193-200
    • /
    • 2024
  • In patients with severe alveolar bone resorption on mandibular anterior edentulous areas, it can be difficult to place implants in the location for crowns, and to create the fixed prosthesis having an adequate emergence profile or embrasure, which makes maintenance difficult. Fabricating a removable zirconia prosthesis with a milled bar on poorly positioned implants can be a good option because of easy maintenance. In this case, the patient had severe bone resorption on mandibular anterior region, and large vertical space. We report on the aesthetical and easy-to-maintain results by placing two implants and fabricating a zirconia prosthesis using milled bar.

PHOTOELASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS OF IMPLANT SUPPORTED FIXED PROSTHESES WITH DIFFERENT PLACEMENT CONFIGURATIONS IN MANDIBULAR POSTERIOR REGION (하악 구치부에서 임플랜트 배열방식에 따른 임플랜트지지 고정성 국소의치의 광탄성 응력 분석)

  • Cho Hye-Won;Kim Nan-Young;Kim Yu-Lee
    • The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    • /
    • v.43 no.1
    • /
    • pp.120-131
    • /
    • 2005
  • Statement of problem. More than 70% of patients who need the implant supported restoration are parially edentulous. The principles of design for implant supported fixed partial denture in mandibular posterior region are many and varied. Jurisdiction for their use is usually based on clinical evaluation. There are several areas or interest regarding the design of implant supported fixed partial denture in mandibular posterior region. 1) Straight and tripod configuration in implant placement, 2) Two restoration types such as individualized and splinted restorations. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare the amount and distribution of stress around the implant fixtures placed in the mandibular posterior region with two different arrangements and to evaluate the effects of splinting using the photoelastic stress analysis. Material & methods. 1) Production of study model: Mandibular partially edentulous model was waxed-up and duplicated with silicone and two models were poured in stone. 2) Fixture installation and photoelastic model construction: Using surveyor(Ney, USh), 3 fixtures(two 4.0 $\times$13 mm, one 5.0$\times$10 mm, Lifecore, USA) were insta)led in straight & tripod configurations. Silicone molds were made and poured in photoelastic resin (PL-2. Measurements group, USA). 3) Prostheses construction: Four 3-unit bridges (Type III gold alloy, Dongmyung co., Korea) were produced with nonhexed and hexed UCLA abutments and fitted with conventional methods. The abutments were tightened with 30 Ncm torque and the static loads were applied at 12 points of the occlusal surface. 4) Photoelastic stress analysis : The polarizer analyzer system with digital camera(S-2 Pro, Fujifilm, Japan) was used to take the photoelastic fringes and analysed using computer analysis program. Results. Solitary hexed UCLA restoration developed different stress patterns between two implant arrangement configurations, but there were no stress transfer to adjacent implants from the loaded implant in both configurations. However splinted restorations showed lesser amount of stresses in the loaded implants and showed stress transfer to adjacent implants in both configurations. Solitary hexed UCLA restoration with tripod configuration developed higher stresses in anterior and middle implants under loading than implants with straight configurations. Splintied 3 unit fixed partial dentures with tripod configuration showed higher stress development in posterior implant under loading but there were no obvious differences between two configurations. Conclusions. The tripod configuration of implant arrangement didn't show any advantages over the straight configuration. Splinting of 3 unit bridges with nonhexed UCLA abutments showed less stress development around the fixtures. Solitary hexed UCLA restoration developed tilting of implant fixture under offset loads.

Periodontal prosthesis on medically compromised patient with few remaining teeth: hybrid telescopic double crown with friction pin method (의과적 문제가 있고 소수 잔존치를 가지는 환자에서의 치주보철 임상증례: 프릭션핀을 이용한 하이브리드 텔레스코픽 이중관법)

  • Ha, Seok-Joon;Lee, Cheong-Hee;Cho, Jin-Hyun
    • The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    • /
    • v.52 no.4
    • /
    • pp.359-365
    • /
    • 2014
  • Successful results of treatments using double crown prostheses for the partially edentulous patients who have a few remaining teeth have been reported in several journals. A double crown removable partial denture can be an alternative treatment for the patients with a poor periodontal condition of remaining teeth. Since a double crown removable partial denture can be applied without the risk of surgical operation to the medically compromised patients with a poor periodontal condition which is inadequate for dental implants, it has psychological and economical advantages. In this case, there were sufficient remaining teeth to be restored with fixed prostheses in maxilla, while there were a few remaining teeth with a very poor periodontal condition so that it was almost impossible to restore with a clasp removable partial denture using these remaining teeth in mandible. In addition, the patient had the medical history of surgical operation due to osteomyelitis in the mandibular anterior areas a year ago, thus difficult to conduct an implant placement. The main objective of this report is to introduce our case because a double crown partial denture using a few mandibular remaining teeth showed satisfactory results in functional and esthetical aspects during more than two years follow-up period in this unfavorable condition.

The Comparison between the success rates of single implants replacing the mandibular first and second molar (하악 제1, 2 대구치를 대체하는 단일 임프란트 간의 성공률 비교)

  • Lee, Hang-Bin;Paik, Jung-Won;Kim, Chang-Sung;Choi, Seong-Ho;Lee, Keun-Woo;Cho, Kyoo-Sung
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.34 no.1
    • /
    • pp.101-112
    • /
    • 2004
  • Osseointegrated implnats have proven to be successful in both full and partial edentulous patients since the 1960s and recently have shown successful results when used to restore single tooth missing. However, in most studies reporting the success of single implants, single implants replacing anterior teeth are more frequently mentioned than posterior single implants. Moreover, in studies regarding posterior single implants, the replaced region seemed to be variable; the maxilla, mandible and areas from the first premolar to the second molar were mentioned. However, considering the difference in bone quality in the mandible and maxilla, and the increased occlusal force in the posterior region, the success rates in each region may be different. In this study, the cumulative success rates and amount of bone loss of single implants replacing the mandibular first and second molar, respectively, were compared and analyzed to come to the following conclusion. 1. The 20 (20 persons) single implants that were placed in the mandibular first molar region were all successful and showed a 100% 5 year cumulative success rate. Among the 27 (24 persons) single implants replacing the mandibular second molar, 8 failed (27.63%) showing a 5 year cumulative success rate of 70.37%. 2. Among the 8 failed implants, one showed symptoms of postoperative infection and one complained of parenthesia. 6 implants failed after functional loading; 5 showed mobility and one resulted in fixture fracture. 3. After the attachment of the prosthesis, there was no significant statistical difference regarding the marginal bone loss in group 1 and group 2 during the checkup period (P>0.05). In conclusion, restoration of the mandibular first molar using single implants was found to be an excellent treatment modality, and when replacing mandibular second molars with single implants, poor bone quality and risk of overloading must be considered.