Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) >
Quantitative analysis of occlusal changes in posterior partial fixed implant supported prostheses
Received date: 2017-10-23
Online published: 2019-12-19
Supported by
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(81671026);the Capital Health Development Research Special(2014-4-4105)
Objective: To analyze changes in occlusal force distribution and occlusal contact in poste-rior partial fixed implant-supported prostheses over time, and to provide reference for the precise occlusion design, adjustment and maintenance of implant prostheses.Methods: According to certain inclusion and exclusion criteria, patients were recruited from partially edentulous patients who had received implant-supported single crown or fixed bridge in the posterior region. The patients were collected since the implant prostheses settling and scheduled for the routine examination of implant prostheses and the occlusal examinations of complete dentition after 2 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months. Occlusal examinations were taken with the articulating papers and T-Scan Ⅲ ? (Tekscan, South Boston, USA), which could check and measure the occlusal contact condition of complete dentition. The occlusion time and relative occlusal forces of implant prostheses, mesial adjacent teeth and control teeth were recorded at the same time.Results: Thirty-seven posterior partial fixed implant prostheses in 33 patients (17 women and 16 men, aged 24-70 years) were followed up for 3-12 months (average 8.3 months). At baseline, the relative occlusal forces of implant prostheses were significantly lower than those of the corresponding control teeth (P<0.001). However, after 3 months, the relative occlusal forces of implant prostheses had significantly increased (P<0.05), while control teeth decreased significantly (P<0.05), resulting in no statistical significance between them. The implant prostheses occlusion time ratio also increased significantly from 2 weeks to 3 months (P<0.05). There was no significant difference from the third month to the sixth month, or from the sixth month to the twelfth month (P>0.05).Conclusion: Light contact and time-delayed occlusion of posterior implant prostheses changes significantly in the first three months after settling implant prostheses. These changes mainly include the advance of the time point of the implant prosthesis to start the occlusion contact, and the increase of the occlusal force of the implant prosthesis. The occlusion of posterior implant prostheses should be carefully monitored at end of the third month follow-up clinically.
Qiang LUO , Qian DING , Lei ZHANG , Qiu-fei XIE . Quantitative analysis of occlusal changes in posterior partial fixed implant supported prostheses[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019 , 51(6) : 1119 -1123 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.06.025
| [1] | Zembic A, Kim S, Zwahlen M , et al. Systematic review of the survival rate and incidence of biologic, technical, and esthetic complications of single implant abutments supporting fixed prostheses[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014,29(Suppl):99-116. |
| [2] | Velzen FJ, Ofec R, Schulten EA , et al. 10-year survival rate and the incidence of peri-implant disease of 374 titanium dental implants with a SLA surface: a prospective cohort study in 177 fully and partially edentulous patients[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015,26(10):1121-1128. |
| [3] | Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE , et al. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012,23(Suppl 6):2-21. |
| [4] | Lee JH, Lee JB, Park JI , et al. Mechanical complication rates and optimal horizontal distance of the most distally positioned implant-supported single crowns in the posterior region: a study with a mean follow-up of 3 years[J]. J Prosthodont, 2015,24(7):517-524. |
| [5] | Anner R, Grossmann Y, Anner Y , et al. Smoking, diabetes mellitus, periodontitis, and supportive periodontal treatment as factors associated with dental implant survival: a long-term retrospective evaluation of patients followed for up to 10 years[J]. Implant Dent, 2010,19(1):57-64. |
| [6] | Kim Y, Oh TJ, Misch CE , et al. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2005,16(1):26-35. |
| [7] | Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K , et al. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2003,90(2):121-132. |
| [8] | Yuan JC, Sukotjo C . Occlusion for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in partially edentulous patients: a literature review and current concepts[J]. J Periodontal Implant Sci, 2013,43(2):51-57. |
| [9] | Bocklage R . Biomechanical aspects of monoblock implant bridges for the edentulous maxilla and mandible: concepts of occlusion and articulation[J]. Implant Dent, 2004,13(1):49-53. |
| [10] | Kerstein RB . Nonsimultaneous tooth contact in combined implant and natural tooth occlusal schemes[J]. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent, 2001,13(9):751-755. |
| [11] | Stevens CJ . Computerized occlusal implant management with the T-Scan II System: a case report[J]. Dent Today, 2006,25(2):88-91. |
| [12] | Lewis MB, Klineberg I . Prosthodontic considerations designed to optimize outcomes for single-tooth implants. A review of the literature[J]. Aust Dent J, 2011,56(2):181-192. |
| [13] | Roberts SD, Kapadia H, Greenlee G , et al. Midfacial and dental changes associated with nasal positive airway pressure in children with obstructive sleep apnea and craniofacial conditions[J]. J Clin Sleep Med, 2016,12(4):469-475. |
| [14] | D’Incau E, Couture C, Maureille B . Human tooth wear in the past and the present: tribological mechanisms, scoring systems, dental and skeletal compensations[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2012,57(3):214-229. |
| [15] | Mundhe K, Jain V, Pruthi G , et al. Clinical study to evaluate the wear of natural enamel antagonist to zirconia and metal ceramic crowns[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2015,114(3):358-365. |
| [16] | Palaniappan S, Elsen L, Lijnen I , et al. Nanohybrid and microfilled hybrid versus conventional hybrid composite restorations: 5-year clinical wear performance[J]. Clinl Oral Investig, 2012,16(1):181-190. |
| [17] | Heij DG, Opdebeeck H, van Steenberghe D, et al. Facial deve-lopment, continuous tooth eruption, and mesial drift as compromising factors for implant placement[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2006,21(6):867-878. |
| [18] | Schulte W . Implants and the periodontium[J]. Int Dent J, 1995,45(1):16-26. |
| [19] | Kerstein RB, Radke J . Clinician accuracy when subjectively interpreting articulating paper markings[J]. Cranio, 2014,32(1):13-23. |
| [20] | Koos B, Godt A, Schille C , et al. Precision of an instrumentation-based method of analyzing occlusion and its resulting distribution of forces in the dental arch[J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2010,71(6):403-410. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |