			Home About us Contact

Single-tooth Implants (single-tooth + implant)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Managing Congenitally Missing Lateral Incisors.

JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, Issue 4 2005
Part III: Single-Tooth Implants
ABSTRACT Three treatment options exist for the replacement of congenitally missing lateral incisors. They include canine substitution, a tooth-supported restoration, and a single-tooth implant. Selecting the appropriate treatment option depends on the malocclusion, anterior relationship, specific space requirements, and condition of the adjacent teeth. The ideal treatment is the most conservative option that satisfies individual esthetic and functional requirements. Today, the single-tooth implant has become one of the most common treatment alternatives for the replacement of missing teeth. This article closely examines the many interdisciplinary issues that arise when treatment planning the placement of single-tooth implants in patients with congenitally missing lateral incisors. The specific criteria that must be evaluated illustrate the importance of an interdisciplinary treatment approach to achieve optimal esthetics and long-term predictability. This is the final article of a three-part series discussing the three treatment alternatives for replacing congenitally missing lateral incisors. [source]

Managing Congenitally Missing Lateral Incisors.

JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, Issue 1 2005
Part I: Canine Substitution
ABSTRACT Dentists often encounter patients with missing or malformed teeth. The maxillary lateral incisor is the second most common congenitally absent tooth. There are three treatment options that exist for replacing missing lateral incisors. They include canine substitution, a tooth-supported restoration, or a single-tooth implant. Selecting the appropriate option depends on the mal-occlusion, specific space requirements, tooth-size relationship, and size and shape of the canine. The ideal treatment is the most conservative option that satisfies individual esthetic and functional requirements. Often the ideal option is canine substitution. Although the orthodontist positions the canine in the most esthetic and functional location, the restorative dentist often needs to place a porcelain veneer or crown to re-create normal lateral incisor shape and color. This article closely examines patient selection and illustrates the importance of interdisciplinary treatment planning to achieve optimal esthetics. It is the first in a three-part series discussing the three treatment alternatives for replacing missing lateral incisors. [source]

Fabricating a provisional restoration for a 2-stage, single-tooth implant with less than optimal angulation

JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, Issue 4 2001
Ahmad Maalhagh-Fard DDS
A technique is presented for fabricating a provisional restoration for a buccally angulated implant. This technique describes the fabrication of a provisional restoration for a labially angulated implant. This technique helps the prosthodontists to achieve esthetics and soft-tissue health until the definitive restoration is available. [source]

Treatment outcome of immediate, early and conventional single-tooth implants in the aesthetic zone: a systematic review to survival, bone level, soft-tissue, aesthetics and patient satisfaction

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, Issue 12 2008
Laurens Den Hartog
Abstract Aim: This study evaluated, through a systematic review of the literature, the outcome of single-implant restorations in the aesthetic zone with natural adjacent teeth, thereby addressing immediate, early and conventional implant approaches. Material and Methods: MEDLINE (1950,2008), EMBASE (1966,2008), and CENTRAL (1800,2008) were searched to identify eligible studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality using specific study-design-related assessment forms. Results: Out of 86 primarily selected articles, 19 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis showed an overall survival rate of 95.5% [95% confidence interval: (93.0,97.1)] after 1 year. A stratified meta-analysis revealed no differences in survival between immediate, early and conventional implant strategies. Little marginal peri-implant bone resorption was found together with low incidence of biological and technical complications. No significant differences in outcome measures were reported in clinical trials comparing immediate, early or conventional implant strategies. Conclusion: The included literature suggested that promising short-term results could be achieved for immediate, early and conventional single-implants in the aesthetic zone. However, important parameters as aesthetic outcome, soft-tissue aspects, and patient satisfaction were clearly underexposed. The question whether immediate and early single-implant therapies would result in better treatment outcomes remained inconclusive due to lack of well-designed controlled clinical studies. [source]

Immediate single-tooth implants in the anterior maxilla: a 1-year case cohort study on hard and soft tissue response

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, Issue 7 2008
Tim De Rouck
Abstract Aim: The objective of the present study was to assess implant survival rate, hard and soft tissue response and aesthetic outcome 1 year after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants in the pre-maxilla. All patients underwent the same strategy, that is mucoperiosteal flap elevation, immediate implant placement, insertion of a grafting material between the implant and the socket wall and the connection of a screw-retained provisional restoration. Material and Methods: Thirty consecutive patients were treated for single-tooth replacement in the aesthetic zone by means of immediate implant placement and provisionalization. Reasons for tooth loss included caries, periodontitis or trauma. At 6 months, provisional crowns were replaced by the permanent ones. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was completed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months to assess implant survival and complications, hard and soft tissue parameters and patient's aesthetic satisfaction. Results: One implant had failed at 1 month of follow-up, resulting in an implant survival rate of 97%. Radiographic examination yielded 0.98 mm mesial, respectively, 0.78 mm distal bone loss. Midfacial soft tissue recession and mesial/distal papilla shrinkage were 0.53, 0.41and 0.31 mm, respectively. Patient's aesthetic satisfaction was 93%. Conclusions: The preliminary results suggest that the proposed strategy can be considered to be a valuable treatment option in well-selected patients. [source]

Astra Tech single-tooth implants: an audit of patient satisfaction and soft tissue form

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, Issue 7 2007
R. M. Palmer
Abstract Aim: To investigate patient centred outcomes, soft tissue morphology, and bone levels. Material and Methods: Sixty-six subjects, who had completed treatment for a single implant restoration at least l year previously. Appearance was recorded photographically and bone levels and interdental contact points measured from intra-oral radiographs using a × 7 scale loupe. Subjects completed a satisfaction questionnaire. Results: Subjects were highly satisfied with all aspects of the restoration including the appearance of the soft tissue (median shape/colour score 6 on scale 1,6). Twenty-eight sites in 20 subjects had no contact point between implant crown and adjacent tooth. A normal height papilla was judged to be present in 19 of these sites. These were excluded from the subsequent analysis. In the remaining 46 subjects with contact points the presence (JEMT score 3) or deficiency (score 1/2) of the papilla was significantly related to the distance to the bone level on the adjacent tooth and implant head. Differences were observed between the mesial and distal aspects of the implant restoration. Conclusions: Examining clinicians were more critical of the restorations than the patients. The presence of a complete papilla was associated with a slightly greater distance from contact point to bone level than previously reported. [source]

Managing Congenitally Missing Lateral Incisors.

In-patient comparison of immediate and conventional loaded implants in mandibular molar sites within 12 months

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 4 2008
Güncü, M. Bar
Abstract Objectives: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of dental implants placed in the mandibular molar sites and immediately functionally restored compared with conventionally loaded controls in an in-patient study. Material and methods: Twenty-four dental implants were placed in 12 patients who had first molar loss bilaterally in the mandibular area. One site of the patient was determined as immediately loaded (IL) and the other side was conventionally loaded (CL). Resonance frequency analyses for implant stability measurements, radiographic examinations for marginal bone levels and peri-implant evaluations were performed during the clinical follow-up appointments within 12 months. Results: During the 12-month follow-up period, only one implant was lost in the IL group. The mean implant stability quotient values were 74.18±5.72 and 75.18±3.51 for Groups IL and CL at surgery, respectively, and the corresponding values were 75.36±5.88 and 75.64±4.84 at 1-year recall, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant between the two groups during the 12-month study period (P>0.05). When peri-implant parameters were evaluated, excellent peri-implant health was demonstrated during the 1-year observation period and all implants showed less than 1 mm of marginal bone resorption during the first year. Conclusions: In the present study, immediate functionally loading did not negatively affect implant stability, marginal bone levels and peri-implant health when compared with conventional loading of single-tooth implants. [source]

Tactile sensibility of single-tooth implants and natural teeth

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 2 2007
Norbert Enkling
Abstract Aim: The purpose of this randomized split-mouth clinical trial was to determine the active tactile sensibility between singe-tooth implants and opposing natural teeth and to compare it with the tactile sensibility of pairs of natural teeth on the contralateral side in the same mouth (intraindividual comparison). Material and Methods: The hypothesis was that the active tactile sensibilities of the implant side and control side are equivalent. Sixty two subjects (n=36 from Bonn, n=26 from Bern) with single-tooth implants (22 anterior and 40 posterior dental implants) were asked to bite on narrow copper foil strips varying in thickness (5,200 ,m) and to decide whether or not they were able to identify a foreign body between their teeth. Active tactile sensibility was defined as the 50% threshold of correct answers estimated by means of the Weibull distribution. Results: The results obtained for the interocclusal perception sensibility differed between subjects far more than they differed between natural teeth and implants in the same individual [implant/natural tooth: 16.7±11.3 ,m (0.6,53.1 ,m); natural tooth/natural tooth: 14.3±10.6 ,m (0.5,68.2 ,m)]. The intraindividual differences only amounted to a mean value of 2.4±9.4 ,m (,15.1 to 27.5 ,m). The result of our statistical calculations showed that the active tactile sensibility of single-tooth implants, both in the anterior and posterior region of the mouth, in combination with a natural opposing tooth is similar to that of pairs of opposing natural teeth (double t -test, equivalence margin: ±8 ,m, P<0.001, power >80%). Hence, the implants could be integrated in the stomatognathic control circuit. [source]

Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 6 2005
Rudolf Fürhauser
Abstract Aim: In this study, the reproducibility of a newly developed pink esthetic score (PES) for evaluating soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns was assessed. The effect of observer specialization was another point of interest. Material and methods: Twenty observers (five prosthodontists, five oral surgeons, five orthodontists and five dental students) were given photographs of 30 single-tooth implant crowns. Seven variables were evaluated vs. a natural reference tooth: mesial papilla, distal papilla, soft-tissue level, soft-tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft-tissue color and texture. Using a 0-1-2 scoring system, 0 being the lowest, 2 being the highest value, the maximum achievable PES was 14. Each observer was requested to make two assessments at an interval of 4 weeks. At the second assessment, the photographs were scored in the reverse order. Results: The mean PES of evaluations at the first assessment (n=600) was 9.46 (±3.81 SD), and 9.24 (±3.8 SD) at the second one. The difference between these two means was not significant statistically (P=0.6379). Implant-related mean PES for single-tooth implants varied from 2.28 to 13.8, with standard deviations between 0.46 and 3.51. Very poor and very esthetic restorations showed the smallest standard deviations. The mean total PES was 10.6 for the prosthodontists, 9.2 for the oral surgeons, 9.9 for the dental students and 7.6 for the orthodontists. Conclusions: The PES reproducibly evaluates peri-implant soft tissue around single-tooth implants. Thus, an objective outcome of different surgical or prosthodontic protocols can be assessed. Orthodontists were clearly more critical than the other observers. Résumé Dans cette étude la reproduction d'un nouveau Score d'Esthétique Rose (PES) pour l'évaluation des tissus mous autour des couronnes d'implants uniques a étéévaluée. L'effet de la spécialisation de l'observateur était un autre point d'intérêt. Vingt observateurs (cinq spécialistes en prothèse, cinq chirurgiens, cinq orthodontistes et cinq étudiants en médecine dentaire) ont reçu des photographies de 30 couronnes sur implant unique. Sept variables ont étéévaluées vs une dent de référence naturelle : papille mésiale, papille distale, niveau du tissu mou, couleur du tissu mou, perte du processus alvéolaire, couleur du tissu mou et texture. En utilisant un système 0,1,2, zéro étant le plus bas et deux étant la plus haute valeur, le score maximum PES était donc de 14. Chaque observateur a reçu comme instruction de réaliser deux évaluations à un intervalle de quatre semaines. A la seconde évaluation les photographies ont étéévaluées dans un ordre inverse. Les PES moyens des évaluations de la première fois (n=600) étaient de 9,46±3,81 et 9,24±3,80 la seconde fois. La différence entre ces deux moyennes n'était pas significative (P=0,6379). Le PS moyen en relation pour les implants sur dent unique variait de 2,28 à 13,8 avec des déviations standards de 0,46 à 3,51. Les restaurations de moindre qualité et les excellentes affichaient les plus petites déviations standards. Le PES total moyen était de 10,6 pour les spécialistes en prothèse, 9,2 pour les chirurgiens, 9,9 pour les étudiants et 7,6 pour les orthodontistes. Le PES évalue donc les tissus mous paraïmplantaires autour des implants uniques. Un aboutissement objectif de différents protocoles chirurgicaux ou prothétiques peut donc être estimé. Les orthodontistes étaient clairement plus critiques que les autres observateurs. Zusammenfassung Ziel: In dieser Arbeit wird die Reproduzierbarkeit eines neu entwickelten Pink Esthetic Index (PES) zur Evaluation vom Weichgewebe um Kronen auf Einzelzahnimplantaten untersucht. Zusätzlich interessierte der Einfluss des Spezialisierungsgrades eines Untersuchers. Material und Methoden: Man gab zwanzig Untersuchern (5 Prothetiker, 5 Oralchirurgen, 5 Orthodonten und 5 Zahnmedizinstudenten) Fotoaufnahmen von 30 Kronen auf Einzelzahnimplantaten. Sie hatten 7 Variabeln gegenüber einem natürlichen Referenzzahn zu beurteilen: mesiale Papille, distale Papille, Niveau der Weichgewebe, Form der Weichgewebe, Defizit an Alveolarkamm, Farbe und Struktur der Weichgewebe. Man definierte eine Bewertungsskala 0-1-2, wobei 0 für den schlechtesten und 2 für den besten Wert stehen, so dass man einen maximalen PES von 14 erreichen konnte. Jeder Untersucher war angehalten, im Abstand von 4 Wochen zwei Beurteilungen durchzuführen. Anlässlich des zweiten Untersuchungstermins wurden die Fotoaufnahmen in ungekehrter Reihenfolge beurteilt. Resultate: Der mittlere PES bei den Untersuchungen im ersten Umgang (n=600) betrug 9.46 (±3.81 SD) und 9.24 (±3.8 SD) im zweiten Umgang. Der Unterschied zwischen diesen zwei Mittelwerten war statistisch nicht signifikant (P=0.6379). Der mittlere implantatspezifische PES für die Einzelzahnimplantate variierte zwischen 2.28 und 13.8 mit Standardabweichungen zwischen 0.46 und 3.51. Sehr schlechte und sehr schöne Rekonstruktionen zeigten die kleinesten Standardabweichungen. Der mittlere Gesamt-PES war bei den Prothetikern 10.6, bei den Oralchirurgen 9.2, bei den Zahnmedizinstudenten 9.9 und bei den Orthodonten 7.6. Zusammenfassung: Der Pink Esthetic Index untersucht die periimplantären Weichgewebe um Einzelzahnimplantate und wird auf seine Reproduzierbarkeit überprüft. Damit kann man die Ergebnisse von verschiedenen chirurgischen und prothetischen Protokollen objektivieren. Die Orthodonten waren deutlich kritischer bei ihrer Beurteilung als die anderen Behandler. Resumen Intencion: En este estudio se valoró la reproductibilidad de una nueva Valor de Rosado Estético (PES) para evaluar el tejido blando alrededor de coronas de implantes unitarios. El efecto de la especialización del observador fue otro punto de interés. Material y metodos: Se entregó a veinte observadores (5 prostodoncistas, 5 cirujanos orales, 5 ortodoncistas y 5 estudiantes dentales) fotografías de 30 coronas de implantes unitarios. Se evaluaron 7 variables frente a dientes naturales de referencia: papila mesial, papila distal, nivel de tejido blando, contorno de tejido blando, deficiencia del proceso alveolar, color y textura del tejido blando. Usando un sistema de puntuación de 0-1-2, siendo 0 el valor más bajo, 2 el valor más alto, el PES más alto alcanzable era de 14. Se solicitó a cada observador que llevara a cabo dos valoraciones en un intervalo de 4 semanas. En la segunda valoración las fotografías se valoraron en orden inverso. Resultados: El PES medio de evaluaciones a la primera valoración (n=600) fue 9.46 (±3.81 SD) y 9.24 (±3.8 SD) en la segunda. La diferencia entre estas dos medias no fue estadísticamente significativo (P=0.6379). El PES medio relacionado al implante para implantes unitarios varió desde 2.28 a 13.8 con desviaciones estándar entre 0.46 y 3.51. Las restauraciones más pobres y más estéticas mostraron las desviaciones estándar más bajas. El PES total fue de 10.6 para los prostodoncistas, 9.2 para los cirujanos orales, 9.9 para los estudiantes dentales y 7.6 para los ortodoncistas. Conclusiones: Las Puntuaciones de Estética Rosa evalúa reproduciblemente el tejido blando periimplantario alrededor de implantes unitarios. De este modo, se puede valorar un resultado objetivo de diferentes protocolos quirúrgicos o prostodónticos. Los ortodoncistas fueron claramente más críticos que los otros observadores. [source]