Esthetic outcome for maxillary anterior single implants assessed by different dental specialists

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the esthetic outcome of maxillary anterior single implants by comparing the esthetic perception of dental professionals and patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients with single implants in the esthetic zone were enrolled in this study. Dentists of four different dental specialties (Three orthodontists, three oral surgeons, three prosthodontists, and three periodontists) evaluated the pink esthetic score (PES)/white esthetic score (WES) for 23 implant-supported single restorations. The satisfactions of the patients on the esthetic outcome of the treatment have been evaluated according to the visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean total PES/WES was 12.26 ± 4.76. The mean PES was 6.45 ± 2.78 and mean WES was 5.80 ± 2.82. There was a statistically significant difference among the different specialties for WES (P<.01) and Total PES/WES (P<.01). Prosthodontists were found to have assigned poorer ratings among the other specialties, while oral surgeons gave the higher ratings than periodontists, orthodontists, and prosthodontists. CONCLUSION: Prosthodontists seemed to be stricter when assessing aesthetic outcome among other specialties. Moreover, a clear correlation existed between dentists' and patients' esthetic perception, thereby providing rationales for involving patients in the treatment plan to achieve higher levels of patient satisfaction.

Interdisciplinary rehabilitation of a root-fractured maxillary central incisor: A 12-year follow-up case report / 대한치과교정학회지

Single-tooth implantation has become a common treatment solution for replacement of a root-fractured maxillary incisor in adults, but the long-term esthetic results can be unfavorable due to progressive marginal bone loss, resulting in gingival recession. In this case report, a maxillary central incisor with a root fracture in its apical one-third was orthodontically extruded and extracted in a 21-year-old female. Implant surgery was performed after a 3-month healing period, and the final crown was placed about 12 months after extraction. After 12 years, favorable osseous and gingival architectures were visible with adequate bone height and thickness at the buccal cortical plate, and no gingival recession was seen around the implant-supported crown. Although modern dentistry has been shifting toward simplified, clinical procedures and shorter treatment times, both general dentists and orthodontists should be aware of the possible long-term esthetic advantages of orthodontic extrusion of hopelessly fractured teeth for highly esthetically demanding areas and should educate and motivate patients regarding the choice of this treatment solution, if necessary.

A Retrospective Clinical Study of Survival Rate for a Single Implant in Posterior Teeth

or = 5.1 mm) and the surface treated by the acid etching group demonstrated a significantly lower survival rate (91.1%). One stage surgical procedure, which implemented a relatively better bone quality survival rate (100%), was higher than the two stage surgical procedure (96.1%). The survival rate of type IV bone quality (75%) was significantly lower than the other bone quality.CONCLUSION: Single posterior teeth implant treatments should use an improved surface finishing fixture as well as careful and safe procedures when performing implant surgery in the maxilla premolar and molar regions since bone quality is poor.