Kısmi Dişsiz Hastanın İmplant-Diş Bağlantılı Sabit Bölümlü Protezle Restorasyonu: Olgu Sunumu

Yıl 2023, , 439 - 444, 25.09.2023

Aykut Gönder , Elif Didem Demirdağ , Emine Hülya Demir Sevinç , Serdar Polat

https://doi.org/10.54617/adoklinikbilimler.1167900

Öz

İmplant-doğal diş bağlantılı protezler, kısmi dişsizliklerin tedavisinde, anatomik koşulların yeterince elverişli olmadığı veya hastanın ilave bir implant yerleşimi için cerrahi işlemi kabul etmediği durumlarda; maliyetin düşürülmesi, kantilever kullanımının önlenmesi, fonksiyon ve estetik için dişeti papillasının korunması gibi endikasyonu bulunan durumlarda protetik rekonstrüksiyon için kullanılan önemli bir tedavi alternatifidir. Doğru bir endikasyon kararı ve protetik tasarımın vakaya uygun şekilde yapılması ile hastanın sabit bölümlü protezle uzun dönem idamesi sağlanabilmektedir. Ancak, bu tedavi seçeneğini uygularken pek çok faktör kapsamlı şekilde ele alınmalıdır. Aksi takdirde, mekanik ve biyolojik pek çok komplikasyon gözlenebilmektedir. Bu vaka sunumunda anterior bölgede diş eksikliği bulunan hastanın implant-diş bağlantılı protezle restorasyonu anlatılmaktadır. Tedavi öncesi yapılan kapsamlı değerlendirmelerle hastaya uygun olan bağlantı tasarımı ve bağlantı lokalizasyonu belirlenmiştir. Tedavi sonrasında yapılan değerlendirmelerde, restorasyonda herhangi bir komplikasyona rastlanmamış ve hastanın hem estetik hem de fonksiyonel açıdan tedaviden memnun olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

implant, diş, sabit, bölümlü, protez

Restoration Of A Partially Edentulous Patient With Fixed Partial Denture By Using Implant-Tooth Attachment: A Case Report

Öz

Implant-tooth connected prostheses are important treatment alternatives for prosthetic reconstruction in the treatment of partial edentulism, when anatomical conditions are not favorable enough or when the patient does not accept the surgical procedure for an additional implant placement; in cases with indications such as cost reduction, prevention of cantilever use, preservation of the gingival papilla for function and aesthetics. With a proper indication and a convenient prosthetic design for the case, long-term maintenance of the patient with a fixed partial denture can be achieved. However, many factors should be considered comprehensively while practicing this treatment option. Otherwise, many mechanical and biological complications can be observed. This case report describes the restoration of a patient with anterior missing teeth with an implant-tooth-linked prosthesis. A thorough pre-treatment evaluation was performed to determine the appropriate connection design and connection localization for the patient. In the post-treatment evaluations, no complications were observed regarding the restoration and the patient appeared to be satisfied with the treatment both aesthetically and functionally.

Anahtar Kelimeler

implant, tooth, fixed, partial, prosthesis

Kaynakça

• 1. Zafiropoulos G-G, Abuzayeda M, Al-Asfour AA, Qasim S-S-B, Pelekos G, Murray C-A. Tooth-implant connection with fixed partial dentures in partially edentulous arches. A retrospective cohort study over an 11.8 year observation period. J Clin Exp Dent 2021;13: 659-68.
• 2. Jung J-H, Choi B-H, Jeong S-M, Li J, Lee S-H, Lee H-J. A retrospective study of the effects on sinus complications of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103:623-5.
• 3. Van den Bergh J, Ten Bruggenkate C, Tuinzing D. Preimplant surgery of the bony tissues. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:175-83.
• 4. Morrison A, Chiarot M, Kirby S. Mental nerve function after inferior alveolar nerve transposition for placement of dental implants. J Can Dent Assoc 2002;68:46-50.
• 5. Ting M, Faulkner RJ, Donatelli DP, Suzuki JB. Tooth-to-Implant–Supported Fixed Partial Denture: A Comprehensive Overview of Systematic Reviews. Implant Dent 2019;28:490-9.
• 6. Pjetursson BE, Brägger U, Lang NP, Zwahlen M. Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant‐supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs). Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:97-113.
• 7. Lin C-L, Chang S-H, Wang J-C, Chang W-J. Mechanical interactions of an implant/tooth-supported system under different periodontal supports and number of splinted teeth with rigid and non-rigid connections. J Dent 2006;34:682-91.
• 8. Chrcanovic BR, Kisch J, Larsson C. Analysis of technical complications and risk factors for failure of combined tooth‐implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020;22:523-32.
• 9. Burak Özcelik T, Ersoy E, Yilmaz B. Biomechanical evaluation of tooth‐and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses with various nonrigid connector positions: a finite element analysis. J Prosthodont 2011;20:16-28.
• 10. Akça K, Uysal S, Çehreli MC. Implant–tooth‐supported fixed partial prostheses: correlations between in vivo occlusal bite forces and marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17:331-6.
• 11. Chee WW, Mordohai N. Tooth‐to‐implant connection: a systematic review of the literature and a case report utilizing a new connection design. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010;12:122-33.
• 12. Kumar SM, Jei JB, Krishnan M. An investigation of effect of rigid and nonrigid connector designs on implant as pier abutment in implant tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis with three-dimensional finite element analysis: an in vitro study. Adv hum biol 2021;11:45.
• 13. Becker CM, Kaiser DA, Jones JD. Guidelines for splinting implants. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:210-4.
• 14. Mosharraf R, Molaei P, Fathi A, Isler S. Investigating the Effect of Nonrigid Connectors on the Success of Tooth-and-Implant-Supported Fixed Partial Prostheses in Maxillary Anterior Region: A Finite Element Analysis (FEA). Int J Dent 2021;2021:1-12.
• 15. Sherif R, Abouel Fetouh A, Ghanem L. Strain gauge analysis of tooth-implant-supported fdp with non-rigid connectors using different implant-abutment connections: in vitro. Egypt Dent J 2017;63:805-14.
• 16. Abichandani SJ, Bhojaraju N, Guttal S, Srilakshmi J. Implant protected occlusion: A comprehensive review. Eur J Prosthodont 2013;1:29-36.
• 17. Lin C-L, Wang J-C, Kuo Y-C. Numerical simulation on the biomechanical interactions of tooth/implant-supported system under various occlusal forces with rigid/non-rigid connections. J Biomech 2006;39:453-63.
• 18. Balik A, Karatas MO, Keskin H. Effects of different abutment connection designs on the stress distribution around five different implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Implantol 2012;38:491-6.
• 19. Da Silva EF, Pellizzer EP, Quinelli Mazaro JV, Garcia Júnior IR. Influence of the Connector and Implant Design on the Implant–Tooth‐Connected Prostheses. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010;12:254-62.
• 20. de Paula GA, Silva GC, Vilaça ÊL, Cornacchia TM, de Magalhães CS, Moreira AN. Biomechanical behavior of tooth-implant supported prostheses with different implant connections: a nonlinear finite element analysis. Implant Dent 2018;27:294-302.