Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지

COMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPLANT-SUPPORTED POSTERIOR MANDIBULAR SINGLE RESTORATIONS WITH MESIAL CANTILEVER

하악구치 임플란트 지지 단일수복에서 근심 캔틸레버가 임플란트 합병증에 미치는 영향

  • Shin, He-Sung (Dept of Implantology, Graduate School of Clinical dentistry, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Myung-Rae (Dept of Implantology, Graduate School of Clinical dentistry, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Sun-Jong (Dept of Implantology, Graduate School of Clinical dentistry, Ewha Womans University)
  • 신혜승 (이화여자대학교 임상치의학대학원 임플란트학과) ;
  • 김명래 (이화여자대학교 임상치의학대학원 임플란트학과) ;
  • 김선종 (이화여자대학교 임상치의학대학원 임플란트학과)
  • Published : 2009.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This retrospective study was performed to analyze the relationship between complications of the posterior mandibular single crowns and distance from the adjacent teeth to the implant. Subjects and Methods: Of the patients who presented Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital & Yonsei University Dental Hospital with missing of the posterior mandibular molar and restored with implant-supported 18 Single crowns between 1996 thru 2007, 115 patients had been followed after crown delivery. The subjects were divided into complication-followed group and a control without any problems. The distance from the most distal tooth to the implant were measured. The prosthetic & biologic complications were reviewed by the cantilever distance and analyzed by abutment type, age & gender statistically using SAS version 9.1 (SAS Inc., USA). Results and Conclusion The results were as follows; 1) The posterior mandibular single crown with cantilever showed higher incidence of follow-up complications upon logistic analysis (p<0.05). 2) The prosthetic and biologic complications are related with the cantilever distance with 2.1 odds ratio and 3.39 cut-off value of specificity & sensitivity by SPSS 12.0. 3) The complications are neither significant in abutment types nor age & gender.

Keywords

References

  1. Schwartz NL, Whitsett LD, Berry TG: Unserviceable crowns and fixed partial dentures: life span and causes for loss of serviceability, J Am Dent Assoc 1970;81:1395-401 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1970.0398
  2. Walton JN, Gardner FM, Agar JR: A survey of crown and fixed partial denture failures, length of service and reasons for replacement, J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:416-21 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90379-3
  3. Dykema RW, Goodacre CJ, Phillips RW. Johnston's Modern Practice in Crownand Bridge Prosthodontics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.,1986;24-36
  4. Malevez C, Hermans M, Daelemans P: Marginal bone levels at Branemark system implants used for single tooth restoration: the influence of implant design and anatomical region, Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:162-9 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070210.x
  5. Sullivan DY: Wide implants for wide teeth, Dent Econ 1994;84: 82-3
  6. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, et al: Bending overlad and fixture facture: a retrospective clinical analysis, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:326-34
  7. Jemt T, Linden B, Lekholm U: Failures and complications in 127 consecutively placed fixed partial prostheses supported by Branemark implants: from prosthetic treatment to first annual check up, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:40-4
  8. Quirynen M, Naert I, van Steenberghe D: Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Branemark system, Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:104-11 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x
  9. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, et al: A six year prosthodontic study of 509 consecutively inserted implants for the treatment of partial edentulism, J Prosthet Dent 1992;67: 236-45 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90461-I
  10. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, et al: Bending overload and implant failure: a retrospective clinical analysis, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;7:40-4
  11. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI.: A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw, Int J Oral Surg. 1981 Dec;10(6):387-416 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  12. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI, Lindhe J, Eriksson B, Sbordone L: Marginal tissue reactions at osseointegrated titanium fixtures (I). A 3-year longitudinal prospective study, Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1986 Feb;15(1):39-52 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(86)80010-2
  13. Norton MR: An in vitro evaluation of the strength of an internal conical interface compared to a butt joint interface in implant design, Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997 Aug;8(4):290-8 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080407.x
  14. Mollersten L, Lockowandt P, Linden LA.: Comparison of strength and failure mode of seven implant systems: an in vitro test, J Prosthet Dent. 1997 Dec;78 (6):582-91 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70009-X
  15. Salama H, Salama MA, Garber D, Adar P.: The interproximal height of bone: a guidepost to predictable aesthetic strategies and soft tissue contours in anterior tooth replacement, Pr
  16. Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implantabutment connection: an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15:519-26
  17. Khraisat A, Stegaroiu R, Nomura S, Miyakawa O. Fatigue resistance of two implant/abutment joint designs. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;88:604-10 https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.129384
  18. Maeda Y. Satoh T. & Sogo M. In vitro differences of stress concentrations for internal and external hex implant?abutment connections: a short communication Pact Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1998 Nov-Dec;10(9):1131-41 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01545.x
  19. Br¨agger U, Aeschlimann S, Burgin W, Hammerle CH, Lang NP. Biological and technical complications and failures with fixed partial dentures (FPD) on implants and teeth after four to five years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001 Feb;12(1):26-34. Lang NP https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012001026.x