• 대한치과보철학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1999.04a
• /
• pp.60-60
• /
• 1999

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.267-277
• /
• 2009

Recently implant supported single crown is the popular treatment option to replace a single missing tooth. The purpose of this retrospective study was to analyze and evaluate the survival of implants with the $TiUnite^{TM}$ surface for single tooth replacement. From September 2002 to December 2006, 269 TiUniteTM surfaced implants were used in single tooth replacements at the Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center. Twenty one cases were excluded because of neighbor implants, missing records & short follow up period. Among 248 implants, the 129 implants (52.0%) were inserted in the maxilla and 119 (48.0%) in the mandible. One hundred implants placement (40.3%) were combined with guided bone regeneration, and 36 implants placement (14.5%) were combined with sinus bone augmentation. Mean observation period was $26.0{\pm}11.8$ months after implant placement. Twelve implants were recorded as failures, rendering a single implant survival rate of 95.2% over the observation period. Among failed 12 implants, 10 implants placed in the maxilla. The survival rate in the maxilla was 92.2% and in the mandible was 98.3%. The use of $TiUnite^{TM}$ surfaced single implant placement showed high survival rate for short time period.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.331-337
• /
• 2005

For a missing teeth, orthodontic treatment may be a better choice of treatment in comparison to a conventional prosthetic replacement such as FPD, resin bonded prosthesis in view of aesthetics, periodontal health and function. Occasionally after an orthodontic treatment, an insufficient space may occur. The mini-implant could be an alternative in situations of narrow ridge dimension, where conventional root form implant could be compromised. The aim of this clinical report is to describe how a space that could not be restored with a traditional root form endosteal implant was managed and to present a technique to achieve optimal anterior esthetics in single implant restoration.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.4
• /
• pp.245-252
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. To present a literature review on implant overdentures after a brief survey of bone loss after extraction of all teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Papers on alveolar bone loss and implant overdentures have been studied for a narrative review. RESULTS. Bone loss of the alveolar process after tooth extraction occurs with great individual variation, impossible to predict at the time of extraction. The simplest way to prevent bone loss is to avoid extraction of all teeth. To keep a few teeth and use them or their roots for a tooth or root-supported overdenture substantially reduces bone loss. Jaws with implant-supported prostheses show less bone loss than jaws with conventional dentures. Mandibular 2-implant overdentures provide patients with better outcomes than do conventional dentures, regarding satisfaction, chewing ability and oral-health-related quality of life. There is no strong evidence for the superiority of one overdenture retention-system over the others regarding patient satisfaction, survival, peri-implant bone loss and relevant clinical factors. Mandibular single midline implant overdentures have shown promising results but long-term results are not yet available. For a maxillary overdenture 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar provide high survival both for implants and overdenture. CONCLUSION. In edentulous mandibles, 2-implant overdentures provide excellent long-term success and survival, including patient satisfaction and improved oral functions. To further reduce the costs a single midline implant overdenture can be a promising option. In the maxilla, overdentures supported on 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar have demonstrated good functional results.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.507-517
• /
• 1998

This study was performed to investigate the soft tissue changes around single implant-supported crowns during followup periods. Twenty patients(31 implants) whose single missing tooth in the maxillary anterior region had been replaced with an single implant-supported crown were recruited for the study. Crown length, soft tissue level and papilla height at the single implant-supported crowns were measured at follow-up examination and calculated from the slides taken at time of crown placement. as well Papilla index was scored from the slides taken at the time of crown placement and follow-up examination. A very little amount of recession occurred and the soft tissue level moved more apically and the papilla height increased significantly (p<0.01). Especially, both mesial and distal papilla index at single implant-supported crowns increased significantly during follow-up periods (p<0.001). When the two slides taken at the time of crown placement and follow-up were compared simultaneously, except one site, papillae size increased at all sites. From the results of the study, the interdental papillae at the single implant-supported crowns seemed to regenerate significantly and their crown margins were stable during follow-up periods. Hence it is indicated that various surgical interventions at on early stage to enhance soft tissue esthetics arourd single implants may be unnecessary.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.637-646
• /
• 2007

Implants placed immediately after tooth extraction have been shown to be a successfully predictable treatment modality. Several clinical papers suggest that placing implants immediately after tooth extraction may provide some advantages: reduction of the number of surgical procedures or patient visits, preservation of the dimensions of alveolar ridge, and shortening of the interval between the removal of the tooth and the insertion of the implant supported restoration. In this case report, three patients received single immediate implant placements to replace a maxillary anterior tooth at the time of extraction. As the three cases were somewhat different, treatment protocols had to be modified as follows: Case 1. Immediate implant placement with healing abutment connection. Case 2. Immediate implant placement with immediate provisionalization. Case 3. Immediate implant placement with Guided Bone Regeneration(GBR). Every implant of these cases was placed in proper position buccolingually, mesiodistally and apicocoronally, The procedures following implantation such as immediate provisionalization and GBR were free of problem. Healing of each case was uneventful. In all cases, treatment outcomes were mostly satisfactory and the results maintained during follow-up periods. However, one case (Case 3) showed some papilla loss due to failure in delicate soft tissue handling during surgery. This papilla loss was compromised by prosthetic means. In conclusion, immediate implant placement in the fresh extraction socket can be a valid and successful option of treatment in aesthetic area. Moreover, this treatment protocol seems to maintain the preexisting architecture of soft and hard tissues in most cases.

• 대한치과보철학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1998.05a
• /
• pp.18-18
• /
• 1998

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.37 no.9 s.364
• /
• pp.636-640
• /
• 1999

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.39 no.9 s.388
• /
• pp.710-715
• /
• 2001

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.32 no.10 s.305
• /
• pp.731-731
• /
• 1994