Alveolar bone resorption after primary tooth loss has a negative impact on straightforward implant installation in patients with agenesis of the lower second premolar

DSpace Repository

Alveolar bone resorption after primary tooth loss has a negative impact on straightforward implant installation in patients with agenesis of the lower second premolar

Details

Files for download

Find Full text There are no files associated with this item..

Overview of item record
Publication Article, peer reviewed scientific
Title Alveolar bone resorption after primary tooth loss has a negative impact on straightforward implant installation in patients with agenesis of the lower second premolar
Author Bertl, Kristina ; Bertl, Michael H. ; Heimel, Patrick ; Burt, Maria ; Gahleitner, André ; Stavropoulos, Andreas ; Ulm, Christian
Date 2017
English abstract
Objectives: To compare the alveolar bone dimensions in patients with lower second premolar (P2) agenesis prior to and after primary molar loss on CT scans, and assess the possibility for straightforward implant placement. Methods: Alveolar bone dimensions were evaluated on 150 mandibular CT scans in three groups: (i) agenesis of P2, with the primary tooth in situ, and regularly erupted first premolar (P1) and molar (M1) (AW); (ii) agenesis of P2, without the primary tooth in situ for ≥3m, but regularly erupted P1 and M1 (AWO); and (iii) P1, P2, and M1 regularly erupted (CTR). The possibility of straightforward placement of an implant 3.5 or 4.3 mm in Ø × 10 mm long was digitally simulated and compared to the actually performed treatment. Results: Buccolingual width (7.3 ± 2.0 mm) at the coronal aspect of the ridge in the AWO group was statistically significantly smaller comparing with both the AW (9.2 ± 1.4 mm) and the CTR (9.5 ± 1.1 mm) group; width reduction appeared to be mainly due to “collapse” of the buccal aspect of the ridge. Simulated straightforward placement of implants with a diameter of 3.5 or 4.3 mm was possible in 62% and 56% of the cases in the AWO vs. 86% and 84% in the AW group (p = .006 and .002, respectively). Straightforward implant placement was actually possible in all patients (22) in the AW group, while 28% (11 of 39) of the patients in the AWO group needed additional hard tissue augmentation. Conclusions: Significant dimensional differences exist in the alveolar ridge, especially in the coronal part, at lower P2 agenesis sites missing the primary tooth for ≥3m, when compared to P2 agenesis sites with the primary tooth in situ. It seems thus reasonable to advise that the primary second molar should be kept as long as possible, in order to facilitate straightforward implant installation and reduce the probability of additional bone augmentation procedures.
DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13033 (link to publisher's fulltext.)
Publisher Wiley
Host/Issue Clinical Oral Implants Research;
ISSN 1600-0501
Language eng (iso)
Subject agenesis
alveolar ridge
dental implant
mandible
primary teeth
second premolar
Medicine
Research Subject Categories::ODONTOLOGY
Handle http://hdl.handle.net/2043/23311 Permalink to this page
Facebook

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Details

Search


Browse

My Account

Statistics