|
| ||
|
|
||
Central Maxillary Incisors (central + maxillary_incisor)
Selected AbstractsManaging the Challenge of Crowning the Single Central Maxillary IncisorJOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, Issue 5 2008ARIEL RAIGRODSKI DMD [source] Single-tooth implant treatment in the anterior region of the maxilla for treatment of tooth loss after trauma: a retrospective clinical and interview studyDENTAL TRAUMATOLOGY, Issue 3 2003Lars Andersson Abstract,,, The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of single-tooth implant treatment in patients where teeth have been lost as a result of trauma. Also, the patients' and professionals' opinions regarding the final outcome of treatment were assessed. Thirty-four patients with 42 lost teeth were evaluated by clinical and radiographic examinations and interviews 2,5 years after treatment. A professional who had not taken part in the treatment evaluated the implant crowns. Central maxillary incisors were the most frequently lost and replaced teeth after trauma (75%) followed by lateral incisors (21%). In patients with incomplete growth, implant treatment was generally postponed until completion of growth. Lack of space was treated by presurgical orthodontics (7%) or by selecting an implant with a reduced diameter (5%). Deficiency of bone was seen in 17% and was treated by bone grafting or local augmentation prior to implant surgery. Patients who had lost two or more teeth after trauma were all subjected to bone grafting. Preservation of roots in the alveolar process seemed to maintain the bone volume enabling better conditions for later implant placement. Forty-one implants (97.6%) were integrated successfully. Complications were few and of minor importance (9.5% before and 12% after cementation of crowns) and could all be managed. No or minimal bone loss was seen. In general, the patients felt that they received good care and that they were well informed about their treatment. Some patients reported that the local anesthesia procedure was not pain-free, but 71% of the patients experienced the treatment as pain-free. For each of the variables (color, shape, height, and size of the crowns), the highest degree of satisfaction was noted in 93,98% of the patients and 91,95% of the single evaluating professional. Given that the patients have finished growth and a careful treatment planning and timing are performed, the functional and esthetical outcome of single-tooth implant treatment today is excellent and can be recommended for replacing tooth losses after trauma in the anterior region of the maxilla. [source] Tooth fragments lodged in the lower lip after traumatic dental injury: a case reportDENTAL TRAUMATOLOGY, Issue 4 2008Maria Cristina Munerato The efficient diagnosis and treatment of dental injury are important elements in clinical dentistry. This article describes a case study of trauma in central maxillary incisors with tooth fragments lodged in the lower lip. Radiographs of the soft structures proved themselves as an important tool in the detection and identification of occult tooth fragments, and play an important role in the establishment of the treatment to be adopted. Also, case follow-up is of fundamental significance in the preservation and maintenance of compromised structures. [source] The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingivaJOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, Issue 5 2009Tim De Rouck Abstract Aim: To detect groups of subjects in a sample of 100 periodontally healthy volunteers with different combinations of morphometric data related to central maxillary incisors and surrounding soft tissues. Material and Methods: Four clinical parameters were included in a cluster analysis: crown width/crown length ratio (CW/CL), gingival width (GW), papilla height (PH) and gingival thickness (GT). The latter was based on the transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin while probing the buccal sulcus. Every first volunteer out of 10 was re-examined to evaluate intra-examiner repeatability for all variables. Results: High agreement between duplicate recordings was found for all parameters, in particular for GT, pointing to 85% (,=0.70; p=0.002). The partitioning method identified three clusters with specific features. Cluster A1 (nine males, 28 females) displayed a slender tooth form (CW/CL=0.79), a GW of 4.92 mm, a PH of 4.29 mm and a thin gingiva (probe visible on one or both incisors in 100% of the subjects). Cluster A2 (29 males, five females) presented similar features (CW/CL=0.77; GW=5.2 mm; PH=4.54 mm), except for GT. These subjects showed a clear thick gingiva (probe concealed on both incisors in 97% of the subjects). The third group (cluster B: 12 males, 17 females) differed substantially from the other clusters in many parameters. These subjects showed a more quadratic tooth form (CW/CL=0.88), a broad zone of keratinized tissue (GW=5.84 mm), low papillae (PH=2.84 mm) and a thick gingiva (probe concealed on both incisors in 83% of the subjects). Conclusions: The present analysis, using a simple and reproducible method for GT assessment, confirmed the existence of gingival biotypes. A clear thin gingiva was found in about one-third of the sample in mainly female subjects with slender teeth, a narrow zone of keratinized tissue and a highly scalloped gingival margin corresponding to the features of the previously introduced "thin-scalloped biotype" (cluster A1). A clear thick gingiva was found in about two-thirds of the sample in mainly male subjects. About half of them showed quadratic teeth, a broad zone of keratinized tissue and a flat gingival margin corresponding to the features of the previously introduced "thick-flat biotype" (cluster B). The other half could not be classified as such. These subjects showed a clear thick gingiva with slender teeth, a narrow zone of keratinized tissue and a high gingival scallop (cluster A2). [source] | ||||||||||