The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 10 ( October, 2017 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Post-insertion Posterior Single-implant Occlusion Changes at Different Intervals: A T-Scan Computerized Occlusal Analysis

Azam S Madani, Mohammadreza Nakhaei, Malihe Alami, Hamidreza Rajati Haghi, Saied Mostafa Moazzami

Citation Information : Madani AS, Nakhaei M, Alami M, Haghi HR, Moazzami SM. Post-insertion Posterior Single-implant Occlusion Changes at Different Intervals: A T-Scan Computerized Occlusal Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (10):927-932.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2151

Published Online: 00-10-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The aim of this prospective cohort study was to evaluate the postinsertion posterior single-implant occlusion changes at 3- and 6-month intervals using T-Scan computerized occlusal analysis.

Materials and methods

A total of 21 patients received single implant, opposed by natural dentition, in posterior regions of the maxilla or mandible (13 premolar, 8 molar) and were finally restored with cemented-retained metal–ceramic crowns. The occlusal contacts were equilibrated according to the implantprotective occlusion concept to develop light contact with heavy occlusion and no contact with light occlusion in maximum intercuspation. The percentage of force applied to the implant crowns (POFI) and contralateral teeth (POFT) was evaluated using T-Scan computerized occlusal analysis at prosthesis insertion, 3- and 6-month follow-up appointments. The data were statistically analyzed using Friedman test and Wilcoxon post hoc test (α = 0.05).

Results

The POFI values at the 6- and 3-month follow-up appointments were significantly higher than those at prostheses insertion (p = 0.001 and p = 0.005 respectively). In addition, there were significant differences between the POFI at 3- and 6-month follow-up (p = 0.020). However, the POFT values at 3- and 6-month follow-up appointments were significantly lower than those at baseline (p<0.001).

Conclusion

The intensity of occlusal contacts of implantsupported prostheses opposed by natural dentition increased after prosthesis insertion. Placement of single posterior implant-supported restoration decreased the percentage of occlusal force applied to contralateral arch.

Clinical significance

A periodic occlusal adjustment of implant-supported prostheses is necessary to prevent potential overloading from the movement of opposing natural dentition.

How to cite this article

Madani AS, Nakhaei M, Alami M, Haghi HR, Moazzami SM. Post-insertion Posterior Singleimplant Occlusion Changes at Different Intervals: A T-Scan Computerized Occlusal Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(10):927-932.


PDF Share
  1. Occlusion on oral implants: current clinical guidelines. J Oral Rehabil 2015 Feb;42(2):153-161.
  2. Occlusion for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in partially edentulous patients: a literature review and current concepts. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2013 Apr;43(2):51-57.
  3. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomech ration Clin Oral Implants Res 2005 Feb;16(1):26-35.
  4. The influence of controlled occlusal overload on peri-implant tissue. Part 3: a histologic study in monkeys. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000 May-Jun;15(3):425-431.
  5. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part II: the prosthetic results. J Prosthet Dent 1990 Jul;64(1):53-61.
  6. Mechanical complications of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11(Suppl 1):156-158.
  7. Impact of implant overloading on the peri-implant bone in inflamed and non-inflamed peri-implant mucosa. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007 Oct;18(5):601-610.
  8. The effect of loading on peri-implant bone: a critical review of the literature. J Oral Rehabil 2014 Oct;41(10):783-794.
  9. Effects of occlusal overload on peri-implant tissue health: a systematic review of animal-model studies. J Periodontol 2010 Oct;81(10):1367-1378.
  10. Occlusal overload and bone/implant loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012 Oct;23 (Suppl 6):95-107.
  11. Active tactile sensibility of single-tooth implants versus natural dentition: a split-mouth double-blind randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014 Dec;16(6):947-955.
  12. Implants and the periodontium. Int Dent J 1995 Feb;45(1):16-26.
  13. Occlusion in implant dentistry. A review of the literature of prosthetic determinants and current concepts. Aust Dent J 2008 Jun;53 (Suppl 1):S60-S68.
  14. Biomechanical aspects of fixed bridgework supported by natural teeth and endosseous implants. Periodontol 2000 1994 Feb;4:23-40.
  15. Dental occlusion: modern concepts and their application in implant prosthodontics. Odontology 2009 Jan;97(1):8-17.
  16. ; editor. Occlusal consideration for implant-supported prostheses: implant protective occlusion. In: Dental implant prosthetics. 2nd ed. St Louis (MO): Mosby Elsevier; 2015. p. 874-912.
  17. How occlusal forces change in implant patients: a clinical research report. J Am Dent Assoc 1995 Aug;126(8):1130-1133.
  18. Relationship between articulation paper mark size and percentage of force measured with computerized occlusal analysis. J Adv Prosthodont 2012 Feb;4(1):7-12.
  19. Determining a relationship between applied occlusal load and articulating paper mark area. Open Dent J 2007 Jul;1:1-7.
  20. Effects of load and indicator type upon occlusal contact markings. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008 Apr;85(1):18-22.
  21. Computerized occlusal analysis as an alternative occlusal indicator. Cranio 2016 Jan;34(1):52-57.
  22. Comparison of closure occlusal force parameters in post-orthodontic and non-orthodontic subjects using T-Scan® III DMD occlusal analysis. Cranio 2016 Nov;34(6):395-401.
  23. Precision of an instrumentation-based method of analyzing occlusion and its resulting distribution of forces in the dental arch. J Orofac Orthop 2010 Nov;71(6):403-410.
  24. Computerized analysis of occlusal contacts after lingual orthodontic treatment in adults. Int Orthod 2011 Dec;9(4):410-431.
  25. ; editor. Vertical dimension. In: Functional occlusion: from TMJ to smile design. 1st ed. St Louis (MO): Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 113-129.
  26. Occlusal pressure redistribution with single implant restorations. J Prosthodont 2016 Oct;26(4):275-279.
  27. Impact of excessive occlusal load on successfully-osseointegrated dental implants: a literature review. J Investig Clin Dent 2013 Aug;4(3):142-150.
  28. Influence of occlusal factors on treatment outcome: a study of 109 consecutive patients with mandibular implant-supported fixed prostheses opposing maxillary complete dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2001 Nov-Dec;14(6):550-555.
  29. Facial development, continuous tooth eruption, and mesial drift as compromising factors for implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006 Nov-Dec;21(6):867-878.
  30. Adult growth, aging, and the single-tooth implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000 Mar-Apr;15(2):252-260.
  31. Lifelong craniofacial growth and the implications for osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013 Jan-Feb;28(1):163-169.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.