• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.4-6
• /
• 2010

PURPOSE. The aim of this article is to analyze the preference for treatment modality of dentists. MATERIAL AND METHODS. Data of 20,038 patients was involved. Data analysis were done by distribution according to the various kinds of prosthesis, including complete denture, removable partial denture, fixed partial denture, implant-supported dental prosthesis as well as distribution according to the professional titles of the dentists finishing the treatment, including resident and professors. RESULTS. The number of cases of dental prosthesis increased year by year. 61.06% of the patients accepted fixed partial denture restoration. The number of patients who accepted implant supported restoration is also increasing year by year. The number of complete denture, implant-supported dental prosthesis finished by professors was larger than that done by residents, while it was contrary for removable partial denture, fixed partial denture, and the difference was statistically significant (P < .05). CONCLUSION. Professors and residents have some difference in the categorization of prosthesis finished. Fixed partial denture and implant-supported dental prosthesis are preferred.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.58 no.3
• /
• pp.268-274
• /
• 2020

Functional and esthetic recovery through reconstruction of the oral and maxillofacial system is important for patients who underwent mandibulectomy due to lesions such as oral cancer. The fibula free flap, which is frequently used in the reconstruction of the mandible, is easy to prosthetic restoration with implant placement. However, patients with growing periods have difficulty in treatment with implants when the size of the fibula is small and residual growth remains. This case is an 11-year-old female patient who underwent mandibulectomy due to osteosarcoma and reconstruction of the mandible using a fibular free flap. Functional and esthetic recovery were obtained through prosthetic restoration using implant-supported fixed prostheses. Implantation site, number of implants, and type of prostheses were considered. Implant-supported fixed prostheses were delivered at 13 years old, and after an additional 1 year observation, stable results were obtained. However, observing changes in the maxillofacial system through further examinations is necessary.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.56 no.3
• /
• pp.212-217
• /
• 2018

Purpose: This study was to assess clinically the incidence of abutment screw loosening of posterior implant-supported fixed prosthesis and its affecting factors. Materials and methods: 391 implant-supported crowns restored from January 2013 to January 2016 were included in this study. All restorations were fabricated with either a single crowns or a splinted crown, and cemented with temporary cement. The incidence of abutment screw loosening is investigated and gender, restoration position, opposing teeth, restoration type, abutment connection type were assessed as possible factors affecting abutment screw loosening. Results: During the observation period (2 - 5 years), abutment screw loosening was found in 29 restorations (7.4%). It took 3 to 48 months (means 19.5 months) to loose the screw, and three of these implants were fractured. Among the factors considered, there were statistically significant differences at abutment screw loosening rate between molar group (9.4%) and premolar group (2.6%) (P<.019). According to the type of opposing teeth, there were statistically significant differences between nature teeth (74.7%) and implant (25.0%), removable denture (3%) (P<.019). The other possible factors did not have a significant effect on loosening of the abutment. Conclusion: The incidence of abutment screw loosening in posterior restoration was 7.4%. Abutment screw loosening were more likely to occur in molars group than premolar group, and according to the opposing teeth, there were the greatest frequency in nature teeth than implant and removal denture. There was a statistically significant difference.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.38 no.1
• /
• pp.42-51
• /
• 2022

Esthetic restoration of maxillary anterior implant heavily depends on the direction of installation of implant fixture. In patients with malpositioned implant, it is crucial to communicate the limitations of prosthetic outcome with the patient before starting on a restoration. To facilitate the communication, three-dimensional virtual representation by superimposing facial and intraoral digital scans with Computed Tomography (CT, dicom file) was used for visualization of the limitations of prosthesis. Through digital diagnostic wax-up, the profile of right maxillary anterior incisor implant was expected to be protrusive, which the patient was not satisfied with. Since the patient already had done root canal treatment on left maxillary anterior incisor due to previous trauma, a new prosthetic design including both right and left maxillary anterior incisors was presented to the patient. The second design was chosen and his comments were delivered to dental lab. The patient was satisfied with the new prosthesis, aesthetically and functionally.

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2007.05a
• /
• pp.274-274
• /
• 2007

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.134.1-134.1
• /
• 1989

• 대한치과보철학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.96-96
• /
• 2003

• 대한치과보철학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.98-98
• /
• 2003

• 대한치주과학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.63-63
• /
• 2003

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.360-365
• /
• 2000

The completely edentulous patient has few treatment options in conventional dentistry. When implants are considered, treatment plans range from a 2-implant overdenture to a completely implant-supported prosthesis. Fixed prosthesis is often the preferred selection of the edentulous patient. fixed full-arch cert amo-metal restorations can be a predictable implant treatment modality for the edentulous patient. Implant-supported fixed prosthesis has several advantages: predictability, fixedness, retrievability, improved function, lower maintenance of prosthesis, long-term published success. Edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible often experience problems with their dentures. Treatment concepts involving two to four implants for the support of an overdenture have been proposed. There seems to be no need to insert more than two endosteal implants to support an overdenture, however, long-term prospective studies are needed to support this notion. Using short endosseous implants and an overdenture in the extremely resorbed mandible is a justified treatment option because of the relative simplicity and low morbidity of this treatment strategy. Implant-supported overdenture has several advantages: Cost, retrievability, hygiene access, profile and contour control, increased retention and stability, implant installed in a predicted region(ant. mandible).