Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The clinical prognosis of implants that are placed against super-erupted opposing dentition

  • Kim, Young-Kyun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Ahn, Kyo-Jin (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Yun, Pil-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Yi, Yang-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Su-Gwan (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • Received : 2015.04.08
  • Accepted : 2015.08.18
  • Published : 2016.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: If teeth are missing, super-eruption of teeth in the opposing arch can occur in the area and can change the occlusal plane. When missing teeth are replaced with implants, the oral surgeon must determine whether or not the super-erupted teeth need to be treated in order to normalize the occlusal plane. In this study, we evaluated the clinical prognosis of dentition after implant placement and prosthetic treatment were completed in an occlusal plane altered by super-erupted teeth in the opposing arch without additional treatment of the super-erupted teeth. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients (9 males, 13 females) were treated with implants and prosthetics without addressing the super-erupted opposing dentition from April 2004 to August 2012 at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. A total of 33 implants were placed. Values of crestal bone loss, survival rates, and surgical and prosthetic complications for an average of 29.6 months after prosthetic loading were recorded. Results: In one case, the cover screw was exposed after implant surgery. The mean crestal bone loss was $0.09{\pm}0.30mm$. Of the 33 implants, 31 survived, a survival rate of 93.94%. A prosthetic complication occurred in one case but functioned well after correction. Conclusion: Favorable clinical results from prosthetic complications, crestal bone loss, and implant survival rates were exhibited in implants next to a super-erupted opposing tooth.

Keywords

References

  1. Craddock HL, Youngson CC, Manogue M, Blance A. Occlusal changes following posterior tooth loss in adults. Part 1: a study of clinical parameters associated with the extent and type of supraeruption in unopposed posterior teeth. J Prosthodont 2007;16:485-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00212.x
  2. Kiliaridis S, Lyka I, Friede H, Carlsson GE, Ahlqwist M. Vertical position, rotation, and tipping of molars without antagonists. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:480-6.
  3. Faggion CM Jr, Giannakopoulos NN, Listl S. How strong is the evidence for the need to restore posterior bounded edentulous spaces in adults? Grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. J Dent 2011;39:108-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.11.002
  4. Creekmore TD, Eklund MK. The possibility of skeletal anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1983;17:266-9.
  5. Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:763-7.
  6. Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: a preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1998;13:201-9.
  7. Cohn-Stock G. Die chirurgische Immediatregulierung der Kiefer, speziell die chirurgische Behandlung der Prognathie. Vjschr Zahnheilk Berlin 1921;37:320.
  8. Wassmund M. Lehrbuch der praktischen chirurgie des Mundes und der kiefer: Band 1. Berlin: Leipzig Meusser; 1935.
  9. Axhausen G. Uber die korrigierende osteotomie am oberkiefer. Deutsch Z Chir 1937;248:515-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02915238
  10. Schuchardt K. In bier, braun, and kummel: chirurgische operationslehre. Berlin: Leipzig Meusser; 1935.
  11. Wunderer S. Surgical correction of the profile by operation on the maxilla. In: Swiss Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, ed. Proceedings: annual meeting Swiss Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica Foundation; 1965.
  12. Compagnon D, Woda A. Supraeruption of the unopposed maxillary first molar. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66:29-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90347-Y
  13. Proffit WR. Equilibrium theory revisited: factors influencing position of the teeth. Angle Orthod 1978;48:175-86.
  14. Gierie WV, Paterson RL, Proffit WR. Response of erupting human premolars to force application. Arch Oral Biol 1999;44:423-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9969(99)00011-4
  15. McArthur DR, Turvey TA. Maxillary segmental osteotomies for mandibular removable partial denture patients. J Prosthet Dent 1979;41:381-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(79)90033-7
  16. Craddock HL, Youngson CC. A study of the incidence of overeruption and occlusal interferences in unopposed posterior teeth. Br Dent J 2004;196:341-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811082
  17. Craddock HL. Occlusal changes following posterior tooth loss in adults. Part 3. A study of clinical parameters associated with the presence of occlusal interferences following posterior tooth loss. J Prosthodont 2008;17:25-30.

Cited by

  1. Clinical and Radiographical Measurements of Supraeruption and Occlusal Interferences in Unopposed Posterior Teeth vol.22, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3143