DİKEY YÖNDE DEFEKTİ OLAN HASTALARDA ANDREWS KÖPRÜ SİSTEMİ İLE PROTETİK REHABİLİTASYON: İKİ OLGU SUNUMU

Year 2020, Volume: 30 Issue: 2, 306 - 311, 15.04.2020

Zahide Aydın Nuran Dinçkal Yanıkoğlu Mehmet Fatih Özmen

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.625188

Abstract

Dikey kemik kaybı olan
hastalar, protetik rehabilitasyon için büyük zorluk yaşamaktadır. Bu şekilde
olan vakalarda sabit dental protezler, destek dişlerin yetersizliğinden ve
kayıp yumuşak dokunun telafi gerekliliğinden dolayı tercih edilemeyebilir.
Hareketli protez palatal ve lingual kaplama nedeniyle konforsuz alan oluşturur.
İmplant destekli protezler geniş kemik kayıplarında sorgulanabilir prognoza
sahiptir. Andrews köprü sistemi sabit ve hareketli sistemlerin kombinasyonudur
ve geniş kret defektlerinde hareketli parçayla birlikte doğal dişlerin destek
olarak kullanıldığı sabit kısımdan oluşur.

1.Vaka: Geniş yumuşak ve sert
doku kaybıyla ilişkili mandibular premolar bölgede dişsiz alan şikayetiyle Atatürk
Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi’ne başvuran 37 yaşındaki erkek hastanın
destek olarak seçilen dişleri tam kuron restorasyon prensiplerine bağlı olarak
prepare edildi.

2.Vaka: 2 sene önce trafik kazası
geçiren ve bu kaza sonucu maksillada oluşan kırıkları miniplaklarla fikse
edilmiş 27 yaşındaki erkek hasta kliniğimize başvurdu. Hastanın maksiller sağ
santral kökü çekildi. Hastanın klinik muayenesinde maksilla anterior bölgede
dikey ve yatay sert ve yumuşak doku kayıpları gözlendi.

  Her iki
vakada da aynı işlemler yapıldı: Silikon ölçü maddesiyle alınan ölçüler
laboratuvara gönderildi. Metal alt yapıların kontrolünden sonra, diş ve dişeti
rengine uygun olacak şekilde hazırlanan final restorasyonlar hastaya başarılı
şekilde uygulandı. Hastaların 3, 6 ve 12 aylık kontrollerinde estetik ve
fonksiyonel olarak protezlerin başarılı olduğu görüldü.

Andrews
köprü sistemi ile özellikle anteriorda geniş kemik ve yumuşak doku kaybı olan
genç hastalardaki protetik rehabilitasyonda, estetik ve fonksiyonel olarak
memnun edici sonuçlar elde edilebilir. Andrews köprü sistemi, dikkatli teşhis
ve planlama yapıldığında iyi bir prognoz sağlar.

 Anahtar kelimeler: Andrews Köprü,
Sabit hareketli protez, Geniş kemik kaybı

 PROSTHETIC REHABILITATION OF THE PATIENTS
WITH VERTICAL DEFECT WITH ANDREWS BRIDGE SYSTEM: TWO CASE REPORTS

 ABSTRACT

Patients
with vertical bone loss have great difficulty for prosthetic rehabilitation. In
such cases, fixed dental prostheses may not be preferred due to the lack of
support teeth and the need to compensate for missing soft tissue. The removable
prosthesis forms an uncomfortable area due to palatal and lingual covering. Implant-supported
proshesis have a questionable prognosis in large bone loss. The Andrews bridge
system is a combination of fixed and removable systems and in the case of wide
crest defects, it consists of a fixed part where the natural teeth are used as
a support together with the removing part.

Case 1: The teeth of a
37-year-old male patient who applied to the Atatürk University Faculty of
Dentistry with the complaint of toothless area in the mandibular premolar
region associated with extensive soft and hard tissue loss were prepared
according to the principles of full crown restoration.

Case 2: A 27-year-old male patient who had a traffic accident
2 years ago and who had fractures in the maxilla was fixed with miniplaks
applied to our clinic. The maxillary
right central root of the patient was extracted. In the clinical examination,
vertical and horizontal hard and soft tissue losses were observed in the
anterior region of the maxilla. The same procedure was performed in both cases: Silicon-based
impression was sent to the laboratory. After the control of the metal
infrastructures, the final restorations prepared according to the tooth and gum
color were successfully applied to the patient. In the 3, 6 and 12 month
follow-up examinations of the patients were successful.

With
the Andrews bridge system, aesthetic and functional satisfactory results can be
obtained in prosthetic rehabilitation of young patients, especially those with
large anterior bone and soft tissue loss. Andrew's bridge system provides a
good prognosis if diagnosed and planned carefully.

Key words: Andrews
Bridge, Fixed-removable Denture, Extensive Bone Loss

Keywords

Andrews Köprü, Sabit hareketli protez

References

• 1. Carr AB, Brown DT. McCracken's Removable Partial Prosthodontics. 12th ed. Elsevier Mosby; 2011. p. 1.
• 2. Andrew, J. A., & Bigg, W. F. Andrew’s bar and sleeve retained bridge: a clinical case report. Dent Today 1999; 18, 94-6.
• 3. Everhart, R. J., & Cavazos, E. Evaluation of a fixed removable partial denture: Andrews Bridge System. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 50(2), 180-184. 4.Maji, S., Patro, T. K., Dhal, A., & Garhnayak, L. Restorıng Teeth And Large Tıssue Defect Usıng Andrew’s Brıdge–A Case Report. Int J Sci Res 2018; 7(8). 5. Korkmaz, T., & Yılmaz, C. Maksiller Defektin Andrews Köprü Sistemiyle Restorasyonu (Vaka Raporu). Gazi Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2005; 22(1), 37-39.
• 6. Cheatham, J. L., Newland, J. R., Radentz, W. H., & O’Brien, R. The ‘fixed’removable partial denture: report of case. J Am Dent Assoc 1984; 109(1), 57-59.
• 7. Angadi, P. B., Aras, M., Williams, C., Nagaral, S., & Angadi, P. Precision attachments; applications and limitations. J Evol Med Dent Sci 2012; 1(6), 1113-1121.
• 8.Shillinburg, H. T., Hobo, S., Whitsett, L., Jacobi, R., & Bracket, S. Treatment planning for the replacement of missing teeth. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics 1997. 3, 85-103. 9. Sajjad, A. Andrews bridge revisited: A new custom cast ribbed bar and sleeve design fixed removable partial denture. Journal of Dental and Allied Sciences 2017; 6(1), 44. 10. Andrews, J. A., & Biggs, W. F. The Andrews bar-and-sleeve-retained bridge: a clinical report. Dentistry today 1999; 18(4), 94-6.
• 11. Seibert, J. S. Reconstruction of deformed, partially edentulous ridges, using full thickness onlay grafts, Part I. Technique and wound healing. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1983; 4(5), 437-453.
• 12. McHenry, K. R., Smutko, G. E., & McMullen, J. A. Restructuring the topography of the mandibular ridge with gingival autografts. J Am Dent Assoc 1982; 104(4), 478.
• 13.Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. History taking and clinical examination. In: Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001. p. 514.
• 14. Walid S., Bone anchored Andrew’s bar system a prosthetic alternative. Cairo Dent. J., 1995. 11:11-5
• 15. Akay, C., Karakış, D., & Yaluğ, S. Dudak Damak Yarıklı Hastada Estetik Ve Fonksiyonel Protetik Rehabilitasyon. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2014; 24.
• 16.Shahroom, N. S. B., & Jain, A. R. Prevalence of (alveolar ridge defect) using Seibert’s classification in fixed partial denture patient. Drug Invention Today 2018. 10(5).
• 17. Çakan, U., Güncü, B., Germeç, D., & Aslan, Y. Yarık damak dudak hastalarında protetik rehabilitasyon. Yeditepe klinik 2006; 2, 11-6.
• 18. Balakrishnan, D., Ahmad, M., Albinali, A., Areashi, A., & Naim, H. An Evidence Based Restoration of Esthetically Challenged Maxillary Anterior Arch with Andrews Bridge System-A Case Report with 5 Years of Follow Up. Dentistry 2016; 6(357), 2161-1122.
• 19. Rathee, M., Sikka, N., Jindal, S., & Kaushik, A. Prosthetic rehabilitation of severe Siebert's Class III defect with modified Andrews bridge system. Contemp Clin Dent 2015; 6(Suppl 1), S114.
• 20. Tambe A., Patil SB., Bhat S., & Badadare MM. Andrew’s bridge system: an aesthetic and functional option for rehabilitation of compromised maxillary anterior dentition. BMJ Case Report 2014
• 21. Manoaharan PS., Mohamed Ali SA., Selvarangam S., Balaji J., & Ibthigar M. A Forgotten Technique for Replacement of Maxillary Anteriors and an associated Bony Defect: A Case Report J Int Oral Health 2015; 7(5):59-61
• 22. Janani, T. Rehabilitation of Sieberts Class III Defect Using Fixed Removable Prosthesis (Andrew's Bridge):-A Case Report. J Pharm Sci & Res 2016; 8(9), 1045.