1992Implant DentistryRequires access

Combination of natural teeth and osseointegrated implants as prosthesis abutments

Per‐Olof Åstrand, K Borg, J Gunne, Malin Olsson

Open publisher page 79 citations

Abstract

This clinical study compared the success of an implant-supported -fixed partial prosthesis with that of a prosthesis supported by a combination of a natural tooth and an implant as abutments. Twenty-three patients who presented with a complete maxillary denture and a Kennedy Class I partially edentulous mandible were treated. Each patient received two bilateral Brånemark implants, posterior to the remaining dentition and 10 to 20 mm apart. Following a healing period of 4 to 5 months, a fixed prosthesis was made for one side that was supported by the two implants and another for the contralateral side utilizing the most posterior natural tooth and most posterior implant. The framework on the natural tooth side was made in two parts connected by a precision attachment. All frameworks were veneered with a light-curing resin. The natural tooth abutment was cemented with zinc phosphate cement and screws were tightened on all implant abutments. A success rate of 88.4 percent for the fixtures and 87 percent for the prostheses after 2 years was reported. Sensory disturbance was observed in 19 percent of the sites. The authors discussed the relationship of anatomy and bone quality in the lateral part of the mandible as factors in the implant surgery. They concluded that there was no disadvantage to connecting teeth to implants in the same prosthesis.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This clinical study compared the success of an implant-supported -fixed partial prosthesis with that of a prosthesis supported by a combination of a natural tooth and an implant as abutments. Twenty-three patients who presented with a complete maxillary denture and a Kennedy Class I partially edentulous mandible were treated. Each patient received two bilateral Brånemark implants, posterior to the remaining dentition and 10 to 20 mm apart. Following a healing period of 4 to 5 months, a fixed prosthesis was made for one side that was supported by the two implants and another for the contralateral side utilizing the most posterior natural tooth and most posterior implant. The framework on the natural tooth side was made in two parts connected by a precision attachment. All frameworks were veneered with a light-curing resin. The natural tooth abutment was cemented with zinc phosphate cement and screws were tightened on all implant abutments. A success rate of 88.4 percent for the fixtures and 87 percent for the prostheses after 2 years was reported. Sensory disturbance was observed in 19 percent of the sites. The authors discussed the relationship of anatomy and bone quality in the lateral part of the mandible as factors in the implant surgery. They concluded that there was no disadvantage to connecting teeth to implants in the same prosthesis.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 79 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This clinical study compared the success of an implant-supported -fixed partial prosthesis with that of a prosthesis supported by a combination of a natural tooth and an implant as abutments. Twenty-three patients who presented with a complete maxillary denture and a Kennedy Class I partially edentulous mandible were treated. Each patient received two bilateral Brånemark implants, posterior to the remaining dentition and 10 to 20 mm apart. Following a healing period of 4 to 5 months, a fixed prosthesis was made for one side that was supported by the two implants and another for the contralateral side utilizing the most posterior natural tooth and most posterior implant. The framework on the natural tooth side was made in two parts connected by a precision attachment. All frameworks were veneered with a light-curing resin. The natural tooth abutment was cemented with zinc phosphate cement and screws were tightened on all implant abutments. A success rate of 88.4 percent for the fixtures and 87 percent for the prostheses after 2 years was reported. Sensory disturbance was observed in 19 percent of the sites. The authors discussed the relationship of anatomy and bone quality in the lateral part of the mandible as factors in the implant surgery. They concluded that there was no disadvantage to connecting teeth to implants in the same prosthesis.

Key concepts: Dentistry, Prosthesis, Abutment, Implant, Osseointegration, Dental Abutments, Medicine, Mandible (arthropod mouthpart)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Combination of natural teeth and osseointegrated implants as prosthesis abutments — Research Paper | ScholarLens