DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

하악 무치악 환자에서 임플란트 하이브리드형 보철물을 이용한 전악 수복 증례

Full mouth rehabilitation of mandibular edentulous patient using implant hybrid prosthesis

  • 김현숙 (인하대학교 의과대학 치과보철과) ;
  • 김소현 (인하대학교 의과대학 치과보철과) ;
  • 오남식 (인하대학교 의과대학 치과보철과)
  • Kim, Hyun-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, Inha University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, So-Hyun (Department of Prosthodontics, Inha University Hospital) ;
  • Oh, Namsik (Department of Prosthodontics, Inha University Hospital)
  • 투고 : 2017.07.03
  • 심사 : 2017.09.14
  • 발행 : 2018.01.31

초록

무치악 환자에서 임플란트 고정성 보철 수복의 장점은 안정성, 편안함을 들 수 있으며, 생물학적 측면으로는 하악골 흡수를 방지할 수 있고 저작기능이 향상된다는 이점이 있다. 그중 하이브리드형 보철 수복은 하악골 이공사이에 4 - 6개의 임플란트를 식립하고 양쪽 원심으로 캔틸레버를 만들어 구치부 치아를 대체하게 된다. 본 증례는 85세 여성 환자로 상하악의 무치악 상태로 본원에 내원하였다. 상악의 가철성 총의치, 하악의 임플란트 하이브리드형 보철물로 최종 치료하여 치료 후 기능적, 심미적으로 만족스러운 결과를 얻었기에 이를 보고하고자 한다.

In edentulous patients, the advantages of prosthodontic therapy using oral implants include both stability and comfort. Advantages suggested for this approach include the prevention of mandibular bone resorption and increased masticatory function. Implant hybrid prostheses place 4 to 6 implants between the mental foramens, and cantilevers are used to replace the posterior teeth at both ends. The 85 - year - old female patient visited our clinic with complete edentulism in the maxilla and mandible. This article reports a satisfactory clinical and esthetic outcome of full mouth rehabilitation using removable complete denture in the maxilla and implant hybrid prosthesis in the mandible.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Tallgren A. The continuing reduction of the residual alveolar ridges in complete denture wearers: a mixed-longitudinal study covering 25 years. J Prosthet Dent 1972;27:120-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(72)90188-6
  2. Cooper LF. The current and future treatment of edentulism. J Prosthodont 2009;18:116-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00441.x
  3. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 3rd ed. St. Louis, MO, Mosby; 2009. p. 94-101.
  4. Drago C, Gurney L. Maintenance of implant hybrid prostheses: clinical and laboratory procedures. J Prosthodont 2013;22:28-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00899.x
  5. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. A review of clinical and technical considerations for fixed and removable implant prostheses in the edentulous mandible. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:65-72.
  6. Kwon T, Bain PA, Levin L. Systematic review of short- (5-10 years) and long-term (10 years or more) survival and success of full-arch fixed dental hybrid prostheses and supporting implants. J Dent 2014;42:1228-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.05.016
  7. English CE. The mandibular overdenture supported by implants in the anterior symphysis: a prescription for implant placement and bar-prosthesis design. Dent Implantol Update 1993;4: 9-14.
  8. Chung CH, Son MK. The classification and comparison of implant prosthesis according to types of retention. Part I: screw retained prosthesis vs cement retained prosthesis. J Korean Acad Oral Maxillofac Implantology 2010;14:138-51.
  9. Misch CE. Dental implant prosthetics. 1st ed. St. Louis, MO, Mosby; 2004. p. 414-6.
  10. Gracis S, Michalakis K, Vigolo P, Vult von Steyern P, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:202-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02556.x