İmplant Destekli Sabit Protezlerde Çiğneme Performansının Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Diş tedavisinin ana amaçlarından biri, diş kaybı nedeniyle oluşan çiğneme performansının rehabilitasyonudur. Tam dişsiz hastalara sunulan tedavi yöntemleri arasında en çok tercih edilen yaklaşımlardan biri, hastaya implant destekli tam ark sabit protezlerin (ISCAFp) uygulanmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmamızda protetik diş tedavisi kliniğinde ISCAFDp (implant destekli tam ark sabit proteze sahip bireyler) ve TBCAFDp (Diş destekli tam ark sabit restorasyona sahip bireyler) ile rehabilite edilen hastalar çalışmaya dahil edildi. Ayrıca kontrol grubu olarak ND’li (doğal dentisyona sahip bireyler) bireyler seçildi. Her grup 12 kişiden oluşuyordu. Çiğneme performanslarını değerlendirmek için elek yöntemi ve yüzey EMG yöntemi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Çiğneme yönü ve çiğneme siklusları sırasında elde edilen EMG sonuçları açısından hasta grupları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark yoktu (p<0.05). Bununla birlikte, elek-hasta grubunun etkileşimi istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu (p<0.05). Sonuç: ISCAFp kullanan hastalar, kontrol mekanizmasının kısıtlılıkları nedeniyle çiğneme kuvvetlerini çekinmeden uygulayabilirler. Dolayısıyla; ISCAFp için, kuvveti eşit olarak dağıtmamızı sağlayan üretim prosedürleri izlenmelidir. İmplant destekli sabit protezlerde çiğneme fonksiyonunun ve performansının objektif değerlendirmeleri, klinisyenlerin has- taları için en iyi tedavi planlamasını yapmasına yardımcı olacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• çiğneme performansı
• implant destekli sabit protezler
• emg

Evaluation of Chewing Performance in Implant Supported Fixed Prosthesis

Öz

Objectives: A major aim of dental treatment amongst others is the restoration of function when masticatory performance is impaired due to tooth loss. The most promising and preferred approach among treatment methods offered to totally edentulous patients is to provide the patient with implant-supported complete arch-fixed prostheses (ISCAFp). Material and Method: patients rehabilitated in the prosthetic dental clinic with ISCAF- Dp and TBCAFDp were included in the study. In addition, individuals with ND were selected as the control group. Each group consisted of 12 individuals. The sieving analysis and surface EMG method was used to evaluate the chewing performances. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the chewing direction and the EMG results obtained during chewing cycles between patient groups (p<0.05). However, the interaction of the sieve-patient group was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: patients using ISCAFp can apply chewing forces without hesitation due to the limitations of the control mechanism. Therefore; for ISCAFp, the fabricating procedures should be followed to distribute the force evenly. Objective evaluations of the mas- ticatory function and the performance of implant-supported dentures will help clinicians for the best treatment planning for their patients.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• masticatory performance
• implant-supported fixed prostheses
• chewing performance
• emg

Kaynakça

1. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Giani S, et al. The Mc- Gill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as a first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Montreal, Quebec, May 24- 25, 2002. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17: 601-2.
2. Elias AC, Sheiham A. The relationship between satisfaction with mouth and number and position of teeth. J Oral Rehabil. 1998; 25: 649-661. Helkimo E, Carlsson GE, Helkimo M. Chewing efficiency and state of dentition. A methodologic study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1977; 36: 33-41.
3. Manly RS, Braley LC. Masticatory performance and efficiency. J Dent Res. 1950; 29: 448-462.
4. Kapur K, Soman S, Yurkstas A. Test foods for measuring masticatory performance of denture wearers. J Prosthet Dent. 1964, 14: 483-491.
5. Kapur KK, Soman S, Stone K. The effect of denture factors on masticatory performance Part 1: Influence of denture base extension. J Prosthet Dent. 1965; 15: 54-64.
6. Nagasawa T, Tsuru H. A comperative evaluation of masticatory efficiency of fixed and removable restorations replacing mandibular first molars. J Prosthet Dent. 1973; 30: 263-273.
7. Edlund J, Lamm CJ. Masticatory efficiency. J Oral Rehabil. 1980; 7: 123- 130. Gunne HSJ et al: Masticatory efficiency of complete denture patients, a clinical examination of potential changes at the transition from old to new dentures. Acta Odontol Scand. 1982; 40: 289-297.
8. Al-Ali F, Heath MR, Wright PS. Simplified method of estimating masticatory performance. J Oral Rehabil. 1999; 26: 678- 683.

9. Olthoff LW, Van der Bilt F, Kleizen HH. Distribution of particle sizes in food comminuted by human mastication. Archs Oral Biol. 1984; 29: 899-903.
10. Pancherz H, Anehus M. Masticatory function after activator treatment. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987; 36: 309-315.
11. Julien KC, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS, Dechow PC. Normal masticatory performance in young adults and children. Archs Oral Biol. 1996; 41: 69-
12. Fontjin- Tekamp FA, Slagter AP, Van der Bilt A, Van’t Hof MA, Witter DJ, Kalk W, Jansen JA. Biting and chewing in overdentures, full dentures and natural dentitions. J Dent Res. 2000; 79: 1519-1524.
13. Fontjin- Tekamp FA, Van der Bilt A, Abbink JH, Bosman F. Swallowing threshold and masticatory performance in dentate adults. Physiol Behav. 2004; 83: 431- 436.
14. Aras K: Kısaltılmış dental ark yaklaşımının ağız sağlığı ve fonksiyonları yönünden değerlendirilmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Protetik Diş Tedavisi A.D. Doktora Tezi, Ankara, (Tez Danışmanı: Prof. Dr. Ufuk Hasanreisoğlu), 2006, pp. 50- 94.
15. Eckert SE, Carr AB: Implant retained maxillary overdentures. Dental Clinics of North America 2004; 48: 585-601.
16. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP: Treatment of fixed or removable implant supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 1: Patient’s assessments. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83: 424-433.
17. Misch CE: Occlusal considerations for implant supported prostheses. In: Misch, CE, eds. Contemporary implant dentistry. 1st ed, St. Louis: Mosby, 1993, 705-733.
18. Huggare J, Skindhöj B. A new method for assessing masticatory performance: A feasibility and reproducibility study. J Oral Rehabil. 1997; 24: 490-495.
19. Wintergerst AM, Buschang PH, Hutchins B, Throckmorton GS. Effect of an auditory cue on chewing cycle kinematics. Archives of Oral Biology 2006; pp. 51, 50, 57.
20. Jiffry MTM. Analysis of particles produced at the end of mastication in subjects with normal dentition. J Oral Rehabil. 1981; 8: 113-19.
21. Palmer R. Teeth and implants. Br Dent J 1999; 187: 183-8.
22. Slagter AP, Bosman K, van der Glas HW, et al: Human jaw elevator muscle activity and food comminution in the dentate and edentulous state. Arch Oral Biol. 1993; 38: 195-205
23. Diaz-Tay J, Jayasinghe N, Lucas PW, et al: Association between surface electromyography of human jaw-closing muscle and quantified food breakdown. Arch Oral Biol. 1991; 36: 893-898.
24. Feine JS, Lund JP: Measuring chewing ability in randomized controlled trials with edentulous populations wearing implant prostheses. Review article. J Oral Rehabil. 2006; 33: 301-308.
25. Wintergerst AM, Buschang PH, Hutchins B, et al: Effect of an auditory cue on chewing cycle kinematics. Arch Oral Biol. 2006; pp. 51, 50, 57.
26. Buzinelli RV, Berzin F: Electromyographic analysis of fatigue in temporalis and masseter muscles during continuous chewing. J Oral Rehabil. 2001; 28: 1165- 1167.
27. Enkling N, Heussner S, Nicolay C, et al: Tactile sensibility of single-tooth implants and natural teeth under local anesthesia of the natural antagonistic teeth. Clinical Implant Dentistry & Related Research 2012; 14(2): 273- 280.
28. Bersani E, Regalo SCH, Sie’ssere CM, et al: Implant-supported prosthesis following Branemark protocol on electromyography of masticatory muscles. J Oral Rehabil. 2011; 38: 668–673.
29. Ferrario VF, Tartaglia GM, Maglione M, et al: Neuromuscular coordination of masticatory muscles in subjects with two types of implant-supported prostheses. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2004; 15: 219–225.
30. Rupinder Singh Dhall, Gaurav Gupta, Shivika Ahluwalia, et al.: Osseoperception in dental implants. International Journal of Periodontology and Implantology, October- December 2017; 2(4):130-135
31. Trulsson M. Sensory and motor function of teeth and dental implants: a basis for osseoperception. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2005; 32: 119-122
32. Van Kampen FMC, van der Bilt A, Cune MS, et al: The influence of various attachment types in mandibular implant retained overdentures on maximum bite force and EMG. J Dent Res. 2002; 81: 170–173.
33. Gartner JL, Mushimoto K, Weber HP, et al: Effect of osseointegrated implants on the coordination of masticatory muscles: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 84 :185- 193
34. Davies SJ, Gray RJM, Young MPJ. Good occlusal practice in the provision of implant borne prostheses. British Dental Journal 2002; 192: 79 – 88.