Abstract
The success rate of implant therapy has improved up to 90–95 %. This can be attributed to a numerous factors namely proper case selection, improved diagnostic and radiographic techniques, good softwares for treatment planning, improved surgical equipments, good surgical techniques and sophisticated implant design. The cost of advanced diagnostic techniques and treatment planning software can sometime limit them from being used routinely. In such unfortunate situations, older technique of exposing the ridge and placing implants wherever possible without regard for favorable implant position or angulation is still being followed. This case report describes prosthetic rehabilitation of a partially edentulous patient who was abandoned by a general practitioner after implant placement. Five implants had been placed in the maxilla in prosthetically unfavorable positions and angulations. Castable abutments were then used and a single bar was cast. This bar was then incorporated in a FP3 type of a fixed maxillary prosthesis opposing existing fixed partial denture in the lower jaw. 1 year follow up shows stable implants, healthy peri-implant tissue, minimal probing depth and no radiographic evidence of pathology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Ribeiro FS, Pontes AE, Marcantonio E, Piattelli A, Neto RJ, Marcantonio E Jr (2008) Success rate of immediate nonfunctional loaded single-tooth implants: immediate versus delayed implantation. Implant Dent 17(1):109–117
Tawse-Smith A, Payne AGT, Kumara R, Thomson WM (2001) One-stage operative procedure using two different implant systems: a prospective study on implant overdentures in the edentulous mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 3–4:185–193
Tanner T (1997) Treatment planning for dental implants: considerations, indications, and contraindications. Dent Update 24(6):253–260
Chan HL, Misch K, Wang HL (2010) Dental imaging in implant treatment planning. Implant Dent 19(4):288–298
Spector L (2008) Computer-aided dental implant planning. Dent Clin North Am 52(4):761–775
Suarez-Feito JM, Sicilia A, Angulo J, Banerji S, Cuesta I, Millar B (2010) Clinical performance of provisional screw-retained metal-free acrylic restorations in an immediate loading implant protocol: a 242 consecutive patients’ report. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(12):1360–1369
Chaimattayompol N, Arbree NS, Wong SX (2002) A simple method of making an implant-level impression when presented with limited space, unfavorable implant positions, or problematic implant angulations. J Prosthet Dent 87(6):684–687
Barbosa GA, das Neves FD, de Mattos Mda G, Rodrigues RC, Ribeiro RF (2010) Implant/abutment vertical misfit of one-piece cast frameworks made with different materials. Braz Dent J 21(6):515–519
Zoidis PC, Winkler S, Karellos ND (1996) The effect of soldering, electrowelding, and cast-to procedures on the accuracy of fit of cast implant bars. Implant Dent 5(3):163–168
Saba Sebastian (1999) Design of a cast bar reinforced provisional restoration for the management of the interim phase in implant dentistry. J Can Dent Assoc 65:160–162
Degidi Marco, Gehrke Peter, Spanel Andre, Piattelli Adriano (2006) Syncrystallization: a technique for temporization of immediately loaded implants with metal-reinforced acrylic resin restorations. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 8(3):123–134
Mirza RB, Gunaseelan R (2010) Full-arch metal-resin cement-and screw-retained provisional restoration for immediately loaded implants. J Oral Implantol 36(3):219–223
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ganesh, P.R., Madhan, G. Prosthodontic Management of Unfavourably Positioned Implants. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 14 (Suppl 1), 202–205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-013-0254-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-013-0254-x