The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Esthetic outcome for maxillary anterior single implants assessed by different dental specialists

  • Al-Dosari, Abdullah (Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University) ;
  • Al-Rowis, Ra'ed (Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University) ;
  • Moslem, Feras (Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University) ;
  • Alshehri, Fahad (Department of Periodontics and Community Dentistry, King Saud University) ;
  • Ballo, Ahmed M. (Department of Oral health Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia)
  • Received : 2016.02.03
  • Accepted : 2016.08.08
  • Published : 2016.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to assess the esthetic outcome of maxillary anterior single implants by comparing the esthetic perception of dental professionals and patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty-three patients with single implants in the esthetic zone were enrolled in this study. Dentists of four different dental specialties (Three orthodontists, three oral surgeons, three prosthodontists, and three periodontists) evaluated the pink esthetic score (PES)/white esthetic score (WES) for 23 implant-supported single restorations. The satisfactions of the patients on the esthetic outcome of the treatment have been evaluated according to the visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS. The mean total PES/WES was $12.26{\pm}4.76$. The mean PES was $6.45{\pm}2.78$ and mean WES was $5.80{\pm}2.82$. There was a statistically significant difference among the different specialties for WES (P<.01) and Total PES/WES (P<.01). Prosthodontists were found to have assigned poorer ratings among the other specialties, while oral surgeons gave the higher ratings than periodontists, orthodontists, and prosthodontists. CONCLUSION. Prosthodontists seemed to be stricter when assessing aesthetic outcome among other specialties. Moreover, a clear correlation existed between dentists' and patients' esthetic perception, thereby providing rationales for involving patients in the treatment plan to achieve higher levels of patient satisfaction.

Keywords

References

  1. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindstrom J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155-70. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678108991776
  2. Stellingsma K, Bouma J, Stegenga B, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. Satisfaction and psychosocial aspects of patients with an extremely resorbed mandible treated with implant-retained overdentures. A prospective, comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:166-72. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.140205.x
  3. Mombelli A, Lang NP. The diagnosis and treatment of periimplantitis. Periodontol 2000 1998;17:63-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00124.x
  4. Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Singh M, Weber HP, Gallucci GO. Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review. J Dent Res 2012;91:242-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034511431252
  5. Cosyn J, Eghbali A, De Bruyn H, Dierens M, De Rouck T. Single implant treatment in healing versus healed sites of the anterior maxilla: an aesthetic evaluation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:517-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00300.x
  6. Hof M, Pommer B, Strbac GD, Sütö D, Watzek G, Zechner W. Esthetic evaluation of single-tooth implants in the anterior maxilla following autologous bone augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:88-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02381.x
  7. Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:43-61.
  8. Luo Z, Zeng R, Luo Z, Chen Z. Single implants in the esthetic zone: analysis of recent peri-implant soft tissue alterations and patient satisfaction. A photographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:578-86.
  9. Baracat LF, Teixeira AM, dos Santos MB, da Cunha Vde P, Marchini L. Patients' expectations before and evaluation after dental implant therapy. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2011;13:141-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00191.x
  10. Cosyn J, Eghbali A, De Bruyn H, Dierens M, De Rouck T. Single implant treatment in healing versus healed sites of the anterior maxilla: an aesthetic evaluation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:517-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00300.x
  11. Hartlev J, Kohberg P, Ahlmann S, Andersen NT, Schou S, Isidor F. Patient satisfaction and esthetic outcome after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1245-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12260
  12. Traini T, Pettinicchio M, Murmura G, Varvara G, Di Lullo N, Sinjari B, Caputi S. Esthetic outcome of an immediately placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implant restored with a custom-made zirconia-ceramic abutment and crown: a staged treatment. Quintessence Int 2011;42:103-8.
  13. Belser U, Buser D, Higginbottom F. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding esthetics in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:73-4.
  14. Meijer HJ, Stellingsma K, Meijndert L, Raghoebar GM. A new index for rating aesthetics of implant-supported single crowns and adjacent soft tissues-the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:645-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01128.x
  15. Fürhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T, Haas R, Mailath G, Watzek G. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:639-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01193.x
  16. Belser UC, Grutter L, Vailati F, Bornstein MM, Weber HP, Buser D. Outcome evaluation of early placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implants using objective esthetic criteria: a cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 patients with a 2- to 4-year follow-up using pink and white esthetic scores. J Periodontol 2009;80:140-51. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080435
  17. Tettamanti S, Millen C, Gavric J, Buser D, Belser UC, Brägger U, Wittneben JG. Esthetic evaluation of implant crowns and peri-implant soft tissue in the anterior maxilla: Comparison and reproducibility of three different indices. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016;18:517-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12306
  18. Kokich VO Jr, Kiyak HA, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent 1999;11:311-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1999.tb00414.x
  19. Gehrke P, Degidi M, Lulay-Saad Z, Dhom G. Reproducibility of the implant crown aesthetic index-rating aesthetics of single-implant crowns and adjacent soft tissues with regard to observer dental specialization. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009;11:201-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00107.x
  20. Cho HL, Lee JK, Um HS, Chang BS. Esthetic evaluation of maxillary single-tooth implants in the esthetic zone. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2010;40:188-93. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2010.40.4.188
  21. Andersson B, Bergenblock S, Fürst B, Jemt T. Long-term function of single-implant restorations: a 17- to 19-year follow-up study on implant infraposition related to the shape of the face and patients' satisfaction. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013;15:471-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00381.x
  22. Buser D, Bornstein MM, Weber HP, Grütter L, Schmid B, Belser UC. Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 subjects with a 2- to 4-year follow-up. J Periodontol 2008;79:1773-81. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2008.080071
  23. Weber HP, Buser D, Fiorellini JP, Williams RC. Radiographic evaluation of crestal bone levels adjacent to nonsubmerged titanium implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:181-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030405.x
  24. Lavigne SE, Krust-Bray KS, Williams KB, Killoy WJ, Theisen F. Effects of subgingival irrigation with chlorhexidine on the periodontal status of patients with HA-coated integral dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:156-62.
  25. Wolfart S, Thormann H, Freitag S, Kern M. Assessment of dental appearance following changes in incisor proportions. Eur J Oral Sci 2005;113:159-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00206.x
  26. Mombelli A, Lang NP. Clinical parameters for the evaluation of dental implants. Periodontol 2000 1994;4:81-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.1994.tb00008.x
  27. den Hartog L, Slater JJ, Vissink A, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. 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;35:1073-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01330.x
  28. Pjetursson BE, Lang NP. Prosthetic treatment planning on the basis of scientific evidence. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:72-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01824.x
  29. Hartog L, Meijer HJ, Santing HJ, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM. Patient satisfaction with single-tooth implant therapy in the esthetic zone. Int J Prosthodont 2014; 27:226-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3672
  30. Palmqvist S, Soderfeldt B, Arnbjerg D. Subjective need for implant dentistry in a Swedish population aged 45-69 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991;2:99-102. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1991.020301.x
  31. Lai HC, Zhang ZY, Wang F, Zhuang LF, Liu X, Pu YP. Evaluation of soft-tissue alteration around implant-supported single-tooth restoration in the anterior maxilla: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:560-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01522.x
  32. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  33. Jemt T. Regeneration of gingival papillae after single-implant treatment. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1997;17:326-33.
  34. Chang M, Wennstrom JL, Odman P, Andersson B. Implant supported single-tooth replacements compared to contralateral natural teeth. Crown and soft tissue dimensions. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:185-94. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100301.x
  35. Priest G. Predictability of soft tissue form around single tooth implant restorations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:19-27.

Cited by

  1. Clinical Application of the PES/WES Index on Natural Teeth: Case Report and Literature Review vol.2017, pp.2090-6455, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9659062
  2. Esthetic evaluation of natural teeth in anterior maxilla using the pink and white esthetic scores vol.20, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12631
  3. Esthetic evaluation and patient-centered outcomes in single-tooth implant rehabilitation in the esthetic area vol.77, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12215
  4. Immediate provisionalization of bone level implants with a hydrophilic surface. A five-year follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial vol.30, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13400