Aesthetics with Single Implants in the Anterior Sector: What Experts Claim



Abstract Views
0

Downloads
0

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Mar 20, 2022
Published Jun 11, 2022
10.24018/ejdent.2022.3.3.182

Abstract viewed = 0 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The objective of this article is to review the keys for the correct placement of implants in the anterior sector of the maxilla in order to achieve long-term implant success and, since it is an anterior sector, correct aesthetics.

There should be a distance of at least 1.5 mm between the tooth and the implant, and ideally, the minimum vestibular thickness of bone of the implant should be 2 mm. Between implants the mesio-distal distance should be 3 mm and regarding the apico-coronal we should have at least 3 mm from the margin of the implant to the future restoration.

The case must be planned carefully and we have to decide: when to place the implant, the provisional restoration, the type of implant, requirement of a graft, etc.

Keywords: Aesthetic, critical contour, dental implants, emergence profile, subcritical contour, implant abutment, three-dimensional position

References

  1. Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, Puisys A. The influence of soft tissue thickness on crestal bone changes around implants: a 1-year prospective controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24(4): 712-719.
     Google Scholar
  2. Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest. J Periodontol. 2000; 71(4): 546-549.
     Google Scholar
  3. Funato A, Salama M, Ishikawa T, Salama H. Timing, positioning, and sequential staging in Esthetic implant therapy: A four-dimensional perspective. The Int J of periodontics and restorative dentistry. 2007; 27(4): 313-23.
     Google Scholar
  4. Kan JYK, Rungcharassaeng K, Deflorian M, Weinstein T, Wang HL, Testori T. Immediate implant placement and provisionalization of maxillary anterior single implants. Periodontology 2000. 2018; 77(1): 197-212.
     Google Scholar
  5. Salama H, Salama MA, Garber D, Adar P. The interproximal height of bone: a guidepost to predictable aesthetic strategies and soft tissue contours in anterior tooth replacement. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1998; 10(9): 1131-41; quiz 1142.
     Google Scholar
  6. Tarnow D, Elian N, Fletcher P, Froum S, Magner A, Cho SC, Salama M, Salama H, Garber DA. Vertical distance from the crest of bone to the height of the interproximal papilla between adjacent implants. J Periodontol. 2003; 74(12): 1785-8.
     Google Scholar
  7. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. J Periodontol. 2003; 74(4): 557-62.
     Google Scholar
  8. Lee EA, Gonzalez-Martin O, Fiorellini J. Lingualized flapless implant placement into fresh extraction sockets preserves buccal alveolar bone: a cone beam computed tomography study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014; 34(1): 61-8.
     Google Scholar
  9. Su H, González-Martín O, Weisgold A, Lee E. Considerations of Implant Abutment and Crown Contour: Critical Contour and Subcritical contour. The International J Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. 2010; 34(4): 335-343.
     Google Scholar
  10. Hinds KF. Custom impression coping for an exact registration of the healed tissue in the esthetic implant restoration. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1997; 17(6): 584-91.
     Google Scholar
  11. Monaco C, Evangelisti E, Scotti R, Mignani G, Zucchelli G. A fully digital approach to replicate peri-implant soft tissue contours and emergence profile in the esthetic zone. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 27(12): 1511-1514.
     Google Scholar
  12. Galindo-Moreno P, Concha- Jeronimo A, Lopez-Chaichio L, Rodriguez-Alvarez R, Sanchez-Fernández E, Padial- Molina M. Marginal Bone Loss around implants with internal Hexagonal and Internal Conical Connections: A 12-Month Randomized Pilot Study. JClin Med. 2021; 10(22): 5427.
     Google Scholar
  13. Piattelli A, Vrespa G, Petrone G, Iezzi G, Annibali S, Scarano A. Role of the microgap between implant and abutment: a retrospective histologic evaluation in monkeys. J Periodontol. 2003; 74(3): 346-52.
     Google Scholar
  14. Galindo-Moreno P, León-Cano A, Ortega-Oller I, Monje A, Suárez F, ÓValle F, Spinato S, Catena A. Prosthetic Abutment Height is a Key Factor in Peri-implant Marginal Bone Loss. J Dent Res. 2014; 93(7 Suppl): 80S-85S.
     Google Scholar
  15. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol. 2009; 80(9): 1388-92.
     Google Scholar
  16. Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Vindasiute E, Linkeviciene L, Apse P. Does residual cement around implant-supported restorations cause peri-implant disease? A retrospective case analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24(11): 1179-1184.
     Google Scholar
  17. Hamudi N, Barnea E, Weinberg E, Laviv A, Mijiritsky E, Matalon S, Chaushu L, Kolerman R. The Association of the One-Abutment at One-Time Concept with Marginal Bone Loss around the SLA and Platform Switch and Conical Abutment Implants. J Clin Med. 2021; 11(1): 74.
     Google Scholar
  18. Canullo L, Iurlaro G, Iannello G. Double-blind randomized controlled trial study on post-extraction immediately restored implants using the switching platform concept: soft tissue response. Preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20(4): 414-20.
     Google Scholar
  19. Al-Nsour MM, Chan HL, Wang HL. Effect of Platform-Switching Technique on Preservation of Peri-implant Marginal Bone: A Systematic Review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27: 138-145.
     Google Scholar
  20. Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004; 19 Suppl: 43-61.
     Google Scholar
  21. Tarnow DP, Chu SJ, Salama MA, Stappert CF, Salama H, Garber DA, et al. Flapless postextraction socket implant placement in the esthetic zone: part 1. The effect of bone grafting and/or provisional restoration on facial-palatal ridge dimensional change-a retrospective cohort study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014; 34(3): 323-31.
     Google Scholar
  22. Tsuda H, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JY, Roe P, Lozada JL, Zimmerman G. Peri-implant tissue response following connective tissue and bone grafting in conjunction with immediate single-tooth replacement in the esthetic zone: a case series. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26(2): 427-436.
     Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.