» Articles » PMID: 34602604

A Single-Center Study of a Resin Inlay Dental Implant-Fixed Prosthesis for Closing Proximal Contact Loss in 89 Patients Who Underwent 3-Year Follow-Up

Overview
Journal Med Sci Monit
Date 2021 Oct 4
PMID 34602604
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

BACKGROUND Proximal contact loss (PCL) is very common between implant-fixed prostheses (IFPs) and adjacent teeth and leads to a high incidence of food impaction. Our aim was to determine if the mesio-distal adjustable (MDA) crown prostheses introduced in this study could easily establish new contacts intraorally without the intervention of prostheses retrieval. MATERIAL AND METHODS The MDA crown requires casting in the inlay framework at the proximal contact area. If PCL occurred, the resin in the inlay framework could be easily removed and refilled chairside. This single-center prospective study aimed to investigate the use of a resin inlay dental implant-fixed prosthesis for the closing proximal contact loss in 93 patients who were recruited from April 2017 to December 2017. Four patients dropped out during the 3-year follow-up; therefore, 89 patients were included. The effect of this technique was assessed by the implant mucosal status and follow-up investigations of food impaction. RESULTS PCL occurred in 29.21% (26 prostheses) of the IFPs. The PCL rate at the mesial contact surfaces (n=24, 26.97%) was significantly higher than that at the distal contact surfaces (n=5, 8.33%) (P<0.01); however, the incidence of PCL was greater at adjacent teeth with significant bone resorption (P=0.00). After readjusting the resin inlay and closing the clearance, implant mucosal status and food impaction were significantly reduced (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study showed that use of the MDA crown for closing PCL was time-saving and effective with satisfactory results at 3-year follow-up.

Citing Articles

Food Impaction in Dentistry: Revisited.

Truong V, Kim S, Yi Y, Park Y Oral Health Prev Dent. 2023; 21:229-242.

PMID: 37345582 PMC: 11619868. DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.b4172837.


Prevalence of proximal contact loss between implant-supported fixed prosthesis and adjacent teeth and associated factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ghasemi S, Oveisi-Oskouei L, Torab A, Salehi-Pourmehr H, Babaloo A, Vahed N J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. 2023; 14(2):119-133.

PMID: 36714081 PMC: 9871184. DOI: 10.34172/japid.2022.023.


Erratum: A Single-Center Study of a Resin Inlay Dental Implant-Fixed Prosthesis for Closing Proximal Contact Loss in 89 Patients Who Underwent 3-Year Follow-Up.

Chen Q, Shi Y, Zhang Z, Song G Med Sci Monit. 2021; 27:e935528.

PMID: 34803157 PMC: 8619814. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.935528.

References
1.
Muddugangadhar B, Amarnath G, Sonika R, Chheda P, Garg A . Meta-analysis of Failure and Survival Rate of Implant-supported Single Crowns, Fixed Partial Denture, and Implant Tooth-supported Prostheses. J Int Oral Health. 2015; 7(9):11-7. PMC: 4589703. View

2.
Jernberg G, Bakdash M, Keenan K . Relationship between proximal tooth open contacts and periodontal disease. J Periodontol. 1983; 54(9):529-33. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1983.54.9.529. View

3.
Rinke S, Roediger M, Eickholz P, Lange K, Ziebolz D . Technical and biological complications of single-molar implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 26(9):1024-30. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12382. View

4.
Wat P, Wong A, Leung K, Pow E . Proximal contact loss between implant-supported prostheses and adjacent natural teeth: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105(1):1-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(10)00174-5. View

5.
Koori H, Morimoto K, Tsukiyama Y, Koyano K . Statistical analysis of the diachronic loss of interproximal contact between fixed implant prostheses and adjacent teeth. Int J Prosthodont. 2011; 23(6):535-40. View