The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Changes in periodontal tissue and denture around the implants in the mandibular milled-bar implant overdenture: A 12-year follow-up

하악 Milled Bar 임플란트 피개의치에서 12년 간의 임플란트 주변 치주조직 및 의치의 변화

  • Choi, Hyun-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Cho, Jin-Hyun (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University)
  • 최현석 (경북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 조진현 (경북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2020.07.09
  • Accepted : 2020.10.13
  • Published : 2021.01.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The mandible has a smaller support area than the maxilla, and in particular, in patients with generalized alveolar bone resorption, the stability of the denture and the masticatory efficiency are significantly low in the case of conventional complete denture, due to the movement of the tongue and mandible. In these patients, implant overdenture is evaluated as a highly predictable treatment method with high retention and stability, and excellent pronunciation and masticatory force. In this clinical case, patient had an edentulous maxilla and generalized alveolar bone resorption in mandible. Therefore, complete denture was placed in the maxilla and implant overdenture using milled bar attachment on 4 implants was placed in the mandible. During the 12-year follow-up period, changes in periodontal tissue and denture around the implants were periodically managed and observed.

하악은 상악보다 지지 면적이 적고, 특히 전반적인 치조골 흡수가 진행된 환자에서는 혀와 하악골의 움직임으로 인해 통상적인 총의치의 경우 의치의 안정성과 저작 효율이 현저히 낮다. 이러한 환자에 있어 소수의 임플란트를 이용한 임플란트 피개의치는 유지력과 안정성이 높고 발음이나 저작력 면에서도 우수한 예지성 있는 치료방법으로 평가되고 있다. 본 증례에서는 상악의 무치악, 하악의 전반적인 치조골 흡수를 보이는 환자에 있어 상악에는 총의치, 하악에는 4개의 임플란트를 식립하여 milled bar를 이용한 임플란트 피개의치를 제작하였다. 이후 12년 동안 임플란트 주변의 치주조직의 변화를 지속적으로 관리 및 관찰하였고, 변화 사항 및 보철물의 정기적인 관리에 대해서 보고하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Lindquist LW, Carlsson GE, Jemt T. A prospective 15-year follow-up study of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical results and marginal bone loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:329-36. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070405.x
  2. Engquist B, Bergendal T, Kallus T, Linden U. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseointegrated implants supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:129-34.
  3. Sadowsky SJ. Mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86: 468-73. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.119921
  4. Narhi TO, Geertman ME, Hevinga M, Abdo H, Kalk W. Changes in the edentulous maxilla in persons wearing implant-retained mandibular overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:43-9. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.107113
  5. Bansal S, Aras MA, Chitre V. Guidelines for treatment planning of mandibular implant overdenture. J Dent Implant 2014;4:86-90. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-6781.131014
  6. Mericske-Stern RD, Zarb GA. Clinical protocol for treatment with implant-supported overdentures. In: Bolender CE, Zarb GA, Carlsson GE, eds. Boucher's prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997. p. 527.
  7. Bakke M, Holm B, Gotfredsen K. Masticatory function and patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a prospective 5-year study. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:575-81.
  8. Labban N. Management of the flabby ridge using a modified window technique and polyvinylsiloxane impression material. Saudi Dent J 2018;30:89-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2017.10.004
  9. Lee BK, Park SH, Lee CH, Cho JH. Implant overdenture impressions using a dynamic impression concept. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:66-9. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.66
  10. Wenz HJ, Lehmann KM. A telescopic crown concept for the restoration of the partially edentulous arch: the Marburg double crown system. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:541-50.
  11. Carlsson GE, Lindquist LW, Jemt T. Long-term marginal periimplant bone loss in edentulous patients. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:295-302.
  12. van Waas MA. The influence of clinical variables on patients' satisfaction with complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:307-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90202-N
  13. Davis DM, Packer ME. Mandibular overdentures stabilized by Astra Tech implants with either ball attachments or magnets: 5-year results. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12:222-9.
  14. Burns DR. Mandibular implant overdenture treatment: consensus and controversy. J Prosthodont 2000;9:37-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2000.00037.x
  15. English CE. Bar patterns in implant prosthodontics. Implant Dent 1994;3:217-29. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199412000-00002
  16. Sadowsky SJ. The implant-supported prosthesis for the edentulous arch: design considerations. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:28-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70084-2
  17. Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Kalk W. Factors to consider in selecting an occlusal concept for patients with implants in the edentulous mandible. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:380-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80378-6
  18. Takeshita S, Kanazawa M, Minakuchi S. Stress analysis of mandibular two-implant overdenture with different attachment systems. Dent Mater J 2011;30: 928-34. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2011-134
  19. Galindo DF. The implant-supported milled-bar mandibular overdenture. J Prosthodont 2001;10:46-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2001.00046.x
  20. Kwon JU, Cho JH. Causes of failed implant attachments and application of double crown implant overdenture in one patient. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2018;56:368-74. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2018.56.4.368