대한치과보철학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics)

  • 제55권1호
  • /
  • Pages.71-78
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 0301-2875(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-3789(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

시멘트 유지형 임플란트 보철물의 신개념 유지 방식: Fiber post의 설측 수평 삽입에 의한 유지력 보완

A new retaining method of cement-retained restoration with linguo-horizontal insertion of fiber post

  • 윤나리 (강동 경희대학교 치과병원 생체재료 보철과) ;
  • 이성복 (강동 경희대학교 치과병원 생체재료 보철과) ;
  • 이석원 (강동 경희대학교 치과병원 생체재료 보철과) ;
  • 안수진 (강동 경희대학교 치과병원 생체재료 보철과) ;
  • 박수정 (강동 경희대학교 치과병원 생체재료 보철과)
  • Yoon, Na Ree (Department of Biomaterials & Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Richard sungbok (Department of Biomaterials & Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Suk Won (Department of Biomaterials & Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Ahn, Su Jin (Department of Biomaterials & Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Park, Su Jung (Department of Biomaterials & Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry)
  • 투고 : 2016.07.12
  • 심사 : 2016.09.21
  • 발행 : 2017.01.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

임플란트 보철물을 지대주 및 임플란트에 연결하는 방법은 크게 나사 유지방식과 시멘트 유지방식으로 나눌 수 있다. 나사 유지형의 장점은 탈착 가능성과 잔류 시멘트가 남지 않는다는 점이나 상대적으로 나사 풀림이나 파절의 비율이 시멘트 유지방식에 비해 높다는 단점이 있다. 반면 시멘트 유지형은 심미적이고 상대적으로 적은 비용으로 보철물을 제작할 수 있으나 탈착의 용이성이 불리하다는 단점이 있다. 이 두 가지의 장점을 조합한 방식으로 SCRP방식이 소개되었다. 그러나 역시 이상적인 임플란트 식립 위치를 전제로 한다. 이러한 여러 가지 보철 방식의 단점들을 해결하기 위하여 잔여 시멘트를 남기지 않으면서 연조직 염증을 예방할 수 있는 fiber post 유지형 보철 연결방식을 새롭게 소개하고자 한다.

The retaining methods of implant prosthesis were classified into a screw-retained and a cement-retained type. A screw-retained prosthesis has many advantages, such as retrievability, preventing residual cement, while their disadvantages include the possibility of screw loosening and fracture, on the contrary advantages of cement-retained prosthesis are relatively low cost, but they are difficult to retrieve. To combine the advantages of both type, screw-cement retained prosthesis (SCRP) type have been introduced. But they still require ideal implant placement. So we introduce fiber post retained prosthesis without residual cement for preventing soft tissue trouble due to excessive cement.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Lee SB. Top-Down implant dentistry of Professor Leesungbok. Seoul; Myoung Mun Publishing Co.; 2004.
  2. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry 3rd ed. St. Louis; CV Mosby; 2007. p. 737-51.
  3. Morton D, Chen ST, Martin WC, Levine RA, Buser D. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding optimizing esthetic outcomes in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:216-20.
  4. Misch CE. Screw-retained versus cement-retained implantsupported prostheses. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1995;7:15-8.
  5. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70203-8
  6. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol 2009;80:1388-92. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090115
  7. Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Vindasiute E, Linkeviciene L, Apse P. Does residual cement around implant-supported restorations cause peri-implant disease? A retrospective case analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:1179-84.
  8. Bragger U, Heitz-Mayfield SJA. ITI treatment guide. vol 8. Quintessence Publishing; 2015. p. 90-3.
  9. Belser U, Martin W, Jung R. ITI treatment guide. vol 2. Implant therapy in the esthetic zone. Quintessence Publishing; 2007. p. 43-5.
  10. Benic GI, Mir-Mari J, Hammerle CH. Loading protocols for single-implant crowns: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:222-38. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g4.1
  11. Abduo J, Bennamoun M, Tennant M, McGeachie J. Impact of digital prosthodontic planning on dental esthetics: Biometric analysis of esthetic parameters. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:57-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.07.005
  12. Hinds KF. Custom impression coping for an exact registration of the healed tissue in the esthetic implant restoration. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1997;17:584-91.
  13. Arman A, Viram U, Surbhi M, Itanshu G. Techniques for retrievability of cement retained implant prosthesis. J Dent Implants 2014;4:161-4. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-6781.140888
  14. Valbao FP Jr, Perez EG, Breda M. Alternative method for retention and removal of cement-retained implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:181-3. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115687
  15. Chee WW, Torbati A, Albouy JP. Retrievable cemented implant restorations. J Prosthodont 1998;7:120-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1998.tb00191.x

피인용 문헌

  1. Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses with New Retention Type Using Zirconia Ball and Nickel-Titanium Spring vol.23, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.32542/implantology.2019002
  2. Retrospective Clinical Study of a Freely Removable Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prosthesis by a Microlocking System vol.2020, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/7929585
  3. Fiber post를 이용하여 임플란트 지대주에 보철물을 결합하는 SB-locking method: A case report vol.58, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2020.58.4.356
  4. Influence of an Implant Fixture including a Freely Removable Micro-Locking Implant Prosthesis on Peri-Implant Tissues and Implant Prostheses: A Prospective Clinical Study vol.10, pp.15, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10153321