Influence of anatomical changes in implant-supported crowns of maxillary central incisors on the functional state

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Immediate implant placement and immediate loading after maxillary central incisor extraction are of great importance. Implant placement with immediate loading is the most preferred method of treatment in the long term. The anatomical constrictions of the maxilla make implant placement difficult. To achieve primary stability and make a screw-retained crown, dental surgeons are forced to fix the implant placing it toward the palatal wall. When the implant is placed this way, the crown will be bulkier than the one of the extracted tooth. This change in anatomy can lead to patient discomfort and some parafunctions (in speech, chewing, etc.).

AIM: To assess the potential discomfort in patients with changes in the crown anatomy of maxillary central incisors after implant-supported prosthetics.

METHODS: Fifty students (25 men and 25 women) underwent intraoral scanning with the 3Shape scanner. A possible increase in the crown volume was simulated in ExoCAD at a rate of an implant + titanium base + layer of structural material with zirconium dioxide as an example, on average equal to 3–4 mm. Onlays imitating the increased crown volume were milled and fixed in the oral cavity of the participants on tooth 1.1, and further examinations were conducted.

RESULTS: The examination revealed that the crown anatomy change brought some discomforts in most of the respondents whose speech and eating were affected.

CONCLUSION: The results reveal that a change in the anatomical shape of the crown during implant-supported prosthetics can affect vital functions and cause discomfort. More attention is needed to implant placement planning, taking into account further prosthetics in the esthetic area. Therefore, the use of angulated implants is encouraged.

About the authors

Khava M. Merzhoeva

RUDN University

Email: kh_a_va@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4049-6229
SPIN-code: 3549-7597

Postgraduate Student

Russian Federation, 6 Miklukho-Maklaya street, 117198 Moscow

Mikhail A. Murashov

A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Email: mmurashov@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3309-538X
SPIN-code: 3355-6397

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor

Russian Federation, 9A, building 1, st. Vuchetich, Moscow

Igor. A. Voronov

RUDN University

Author for correspondence.
Email: voronov77@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6873-5869
SPIN-code: 8186-2654

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor

Russian Federation, 6 Miklukho-Maklaya street, 117198 Moscow

References

  1. Van Nimwegen WG, Goené RJ, Van Daelen AC, et al. Immediate implant placement and provisionalisation in the aesthetic zone. J Oral Rehabil. 2016;43(10):745–752. doi: 10.1111/joor.12420
  2. Barone A, Rispoli L, Vozza I, et al. Immediate restoration of single implants placed immediately after tooth extraction. J Periodontol. 2006;77(11):1914–1920. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.060072
  3. Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, et al. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23 Suppl.6:2–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x
  4. Den Hartog L, Slater JJ, Vissink A, et al. Treatment outcome of immediate, early and conventional single-tooth implants in the aesthetic zone: a systematic review to survival, bone level, soft-tissue, aesthetics and patient satisfaction. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35(12):1073–1086. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01330.x
  5. De Rouck T, Collys K, Cosyn J. Single-tooth replacement in the anterior maxilla by means of immediate implantation and provisionalization: a review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(5):897–904. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60010-X
  6. Cosyn J, Hooghe N, De Bruyn H. A systematic review on the frequency of advanced recession following single immediate implant treatment. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(6):582–589. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2012.01888.x
  7. Harris EF, Hassankiadeh S, Harris JT. Maxillary incisor crown-root relationships in different angle malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial OrthoP. 1993;103(1):48–53. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(93)70104-V
  8. Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Polyzos IP, et al. Timing of implant placement after tooth extraction: immediate, immediate-delayed or delayed implants? A Cochrane systematic review. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2010;3(3):189–205.
  9. Gluckman H, Pontes CC, Du Toit J. Radial plane tooth position and bone wall dimensions in the anterior maxilla: A CBCT classification for immediate implant placement. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 120(1):50–56. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.09.005
  10. Kan JY, Roe P, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Classification of sagittal root position in relation to the anterior maxillary osseous housing for immediate implant placement: a cone beam computed tomography study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(4):873–876.
  11. Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Singh M, et al. Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review. J Dent Res. 2012;91(3):242–248. doi: 10.1177/0022034511431252
  12. Braut V, Bornstein MM, Belser U, Buser D. Thickness of the anterior maxillary facial bone wall-a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011;31(2):125–131.
  13. González-Martín O, Veltri M. Immediate Implant in Maxillary Central Incisors and Prosthetic Screw Channel: A CBCT Feasibility Study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2021;41(2):245–251. doi: 10.11607/prd.4564
  14. Chung SH, Park YS, Chung SH, Shon WJ. Determination of implant position for immediate implant placement in maxillary central incisors using palatal soft tissue landmarks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(3):627–633. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2907
  15. Glauser R, Zembic A, Hämmerle CH. A systematic review of marginal soft tissue at implants subjected to immediate loading or immediate restoration. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17 Suppl. 2:82–92. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01355.x
  16. Groisman M, Frossard WM, Ferreira HM, et al. Single-tooth implants in the maxillary incisor region with immediate provisionalization: 2-year prospective study. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2003; 15(2):115–122, 124.
  17. Chen ST, Wilson TG Jr, Hämmerle CH. Immediate or early placement of implants following tooth extraction: review of biologic basis, clinical procedures, and outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19 Suppl.:12–25.
  18. Shapoff CA, Lahey BJ. Crestal bone loss and the consequences of retained excess cement around dental implants. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012;33(2):94–96, 98–101.
  19. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol. 2009;80(9):1388–1392. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.090115
  20. Murashov MA, Shorstov YaV, Venter IV. Ispol’zovanie uglovykh implantatov kak al’ternativnyi metod slozhnym resheniyam v implantatsii i protezirovanii. Digital Dentistry. 2019;10(1):45–50. (In Russ).
  21. Sahin S, Cehreli MC. The significance of passive framework fit in implant prosthodontics: current status. Implant Dent. 2001;10(2):85–92. doi: 10.1097/00008505-200104000-00003
  22. Wee AG, Aquilino SA, Schneider RL. Strategies to achieve fit in implant prosthodontics: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(2):167–178.
  23. Chu SJ, Tarnow DP. Managing esthetic challenges with anterior implants. Part 1: midfacial recession defects from etiology to resolution. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2013;34(S7):26–31.
  24. Chu SJ, Saito H, Östman PO, et al. Immediate Tooth Replacement Therapy in Postextraction Sockets: A Comparative Prospective Study on the Effect of Variable Platform-Switched Subcrestal Angle Correction Implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020;40(4):509–517. doi: 10.11607/prd.4440
  25. Howes D. Angled Implant Design to Accommodate Screw-retained Implant-supported Prostheses. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2017 ;38(7):458–463.
  26. Wadia R. Complications of angulated implant abutments. Br Dent J. 2019;227(6):475. doi: 10.1038/s41415-019-0805-6
  27. Omori Y, Lang NP, Botticelli D, et al. Biological and mechanical complications of angulated abutments connected to fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Oral Rehabil. 2020;47(1):101–111. doi: 10.1111/joor.12877.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Direct implant installed closely to the palatal wall in the socket of the extracted tooth.

Download (238KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Deviation of the direct implant apex to the palatal side.

Download (204KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Angulated implant in a perfect position to achieve primary stability and produce a screw-retained crown.

Download (225KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Direct implant installed more palatially, which results in a bulkier crown.

Download (229KB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. The bulkier crown on the palatal side is different from the individual anatomical form.

Download (115KB)
Indexing metadata
7. Fig. 6. Increased size of the crown palatially approximately 3 mm.

Download (87KB)
Indexing metadata
8. Fig. 7. Overlays created in a computer program.

Download (264KB)
Indexing metadata
9. Fig. 8. Milled overlays.

Download (189KB)
Indexing metadata
10. Fig. 9. Overlays after milling.

Download (47KB)
Indexing metadata
11. Fig. 10. Overlay fixed on tooth 1.1.

Download (166KB)
Indexing metadata
12. Fig. 11. Questionnaire (application form).

Download (100KB)
Indexing metadata
13. Fig. 12. Completed application form.

Download (161KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2023 Eco-Vector


 


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies