The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Radiographic evaluation of computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized abutment of implant

CAD/CAM으로 제작된 임플란트 맞춤형 지대주의 방사선학적 평가

  • Yun, Tae-Gyeong (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Lee, Gyeong-Je (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Chung, Chae-Heon (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Kim, Hee-Jung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • 윤태경 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 이경제 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 정재헌 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 김희중 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2017.04.05
  • Accepted : 2017.06.13
  • Published : 2017.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: In this study, the retrospective radiographic study is executed to evaluate amount of bone loss of various conditions in patients using customized abutment for 4 years of follow-up. Materials and methods: The subjects of this study were implant fixed dental prosthesis using CAD/CAM customized abutments. CAD/CAM customized abutment and fixed dental prosthesis were manufactured by the Prosthodontics Department of Chosun University Dental Hospital from August 1, 2011 to July 31, 2012. Radiological assessments were performed on the patients who were treated by the fixed prosthodontics. After each treatment, a retrospective study was performed for a total of 4 years at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years. Results: As a result of the study, the customized abutment using CAD/CAM showed less bone loss than the results of existing research. There was no statistically significant differences at alveolar bone loss between splinting group and non-splinting group (respectively 0.27 mm, 0.5 mm). Also, there were statistically significant differences at alveolar bone loss in mx. anterior, mx. posterior, mn. anterior and mn. posterior part (respectively 1.37 mm, 0.39 mm, 0.00 mm, 0.30 mm). Conclusion: The customized abutment using CAD/CAM showed less bone loss than the results of existing research, there were statistically significant differences at alveolar bone loss in implant positions.

목적: 이번 연구에서, 다양한 상황에서 골소실양을 평가하기 위하여 맞춤형 지대주를 사용한 환자에서 4년간의 후향적 방사선학적인 연구를 시행하였다. 대상 및 방법: 이번 연구의 대상은 CAD/CAM 맞춤형 지대주를 이용한 임플란트 고정성 보철물이다. 2011년 8월 1일부터 2012년 7월 31일 까지 조선대학교 치과병원 보철과에서 제작하여 고정성 보철물로 사용된 CAD/CAM 맞춤형 지대주와 상부 보철물들을 대상으로 하였으며, 고정성 보철물을 제작한 환자에 대하여 방사선학적 평가를 시행하여 보철물 장착 후 3개월, 6개월, 1년, 2년, 3년, 4년 단위로 총 4년 간의 후향적 연구를 시행하였다. 결과:연구 결과, CAD/CAM을 이용한 맞춤형 지대주는 기존 연구 결과에 비해 골소실 양이 적었다. 연결 고정된 그룹과 연결 고정되지 않은 그룹 간에 골소실 양(각각 0.27 mm, 0.5 mm)에 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 없었다. 또한 상악 전치부, 상악 구치부, 하악 전치부, 하악 구치부의 부위별 골소실양(각각 1.37 mm, 0.39 mm, 0.00 mm, 0.30 mm)에 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다. 결론:CAD/CAM을 이용한 맞춤형 지대주는 연결 고정 여부에 따른 골소실 양에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 없었으며, 임플란트 식립 부위에 따른 골소실 양에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Goto T, Nishinaka H, Kashiwabara T, Nagao K, Ichikawa T. Main occluding area in partially edentulous patients: changes before and after implant treatment. J Oral Rehabil 2012;39:677-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2012.02318.x
  2. Mericske-Stern RD, Taylor TD, Belser U. Management of the edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:108-25. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011S1108.x
  3. Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100. https://doi.org/10.3109/02844316909036699
  4. 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
  5. Le Guehennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007;23:844-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.025
  6. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70203-8
  7. Doring K, Eisenmann E, Stiller M. Functional and esthetic considerations for single-tooth Ankylos implant-crowns: 8 years of clinical performance. J Oral Implantol 2004;30:198-209. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2004)30<198:FAECFS>2.0.CO;2
  8. Brunski JB. Biomaterials and biomechanics in dental implant design. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:85-97.
  9. Gross M, Abramovich I, Weiss EI. Microleakage at the abutmentimplant interface of osseointegrated implants: a comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:94-100.
  10. Duke ES. The status of CAD/CAM in restorative dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2001;22:968-72.
  11. Lewis S, Beumer J 3rd, Hornburg W, Moy P. The "UCLA" abutment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:183-9.
  12. Fuster-Torres MA, Albalat-Estela S, Alcaniz-Raya M, Penarrocha-Diago M. CAD / CAM dental systems in implant dentistry: update. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2009;14:E141-5.
  13. Yoo HS, Kang SN, Jeong CM, Yun MJ, Huh JB, Jeon YC. Effects of implant collar design on marginal bone and soft tissue. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2012;50:21-8. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2012.50.1.21
  14. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The longterm efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  15. Porter JA, von Fraunhofer JA. Success or failure of dental implants? A literature review with treatment considerations. Gen Dent 2005;53:423-32.
  16. Priest G. Virtual-designed and computer-milled implant abutments. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;63:22-32.
  17. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 2009;28:44-56. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.28.44
  18. Galindo-Moreno P, Leo′n-Cano A, Monje A, Ortega-Oller I, O'Valle F, Catena A. Abutment height influences the effect of platform switching on peri-implant marginal bone loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:167-73.
  19. Cho YB, Moon SJ, Chung CH, Kim HJ. Resorption of labial bone in maxillary anterior implant. J Adv Prosthodont 2011;3:85-9. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2011.3.2.85
  20. Vigolo P, Zaccaria M. Clinical evaluation of marginal bone level change of multiple adjacent implants restored with splinted and nonsplinted restorations: a 5-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:1189-94.
  21. Wahlstrom M, Sagulin GB, Jansson LE. Clinical follow-up of unilateral, fixed dental prosthesis on maxillary implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:1294-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01948.x