Diş hekimliğinde implant uygulamaları, yüksek başarı ve sağkalım oranları ile diş eksikliği nedeni ile kaybedilen fonksiyon ve estetiği geri kazandırmak için sıklıkla tercih edilen bir tedavi seçeneğidir. Son yıllarda, hasta ve hekimlerin artan estetik beklentileri, oral implantolojinin protetik aşamasını çok daha önemli bir hâle getirmiştir. Oral implantolojide, implant destekli sabit protetik restorasyonlar için kullanılan dayanaklar, sıkça güncellenen komponentler arasında yer almaktadır. Üretici firmalar tarafından pek çok farklı dayanak seçeneği piyasaya sunulmakta ve bu çeşitlilik hekim için tercih yapmayı zorlaştırmaktadır. Dental implant uygulamalarında, kapsamlı bir tedavi planlaması için biyomekanik, estetik, periodontal ve restoratif malzeme seçeneğinin de aralarında bulunduğu pek çok parametre dikkatle değerlendirilmelidir. Doğru bir dayanak seçimi, mekanik olarak stabil ve estetik olarak beklentiyi karşılayan protetik restorasyonlar üretilebilmesi için kritik önem taşımaktadır. Mevcut klinik duruma uygun bir dayanak seçimi için kullanılacak olan dayanağın materyali, şekli, tipi ve implant-dayanak bağlantı tasarımı hakkında bilgi sahibi olunması gerekmektedir. Dental implantların uzun dönem klinik başarısı, mikrohareket, anti-rotasyonel stabilite ve bakteriyel sızıntı gibi implant-dayanak bağlantısı ile ilgili çeşitli faktörlerden etkilenmektedir. Bu çalışmada; dayanak çeşitleri, şekilleri, dayanak üretiminde kullanılan malzemeler ve piyasada mevcut implant-dayanak bağlantı tasarımları ile ilgili bilgi verilmesi amaçlanmaktadır. İmplant destekli sabit protetik restorasyonlar için dayanak seçimi konusunda bilgi sahibi olmak, hekimin klinik pratikte zorlayıcı bir karar olan dayanak tercihini kolaylaştırmaya yardımcı olabilmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Diş implantasyonu, endosseöz; dental implant-kaide tasarımı; diş dayanakları
Dental implant therapy is an often preferred treatment option to restore oral functions and aesthetics in patients with missing teeth. The restorative procedure of implant dentistry has become increasingly sophisticated in recent years due to the constant increase of patient's demands for dental esthetics. Abutments for implant supported restorations are among the components that undergo frequent updates. Several abutment options have been introduced to dental market that makes the selection more complex and complicated for the clinicians. Many factors should be considered for a comprehensive treatment planning including biomechanics, esthetics, periodontal and restorative material options. Choosing the correct abutment has great importance to achieve a mechanically stable and esthetically pleasing restoration. It is critical to know the details of available abutment materials, their shapes, the type and design of the implant-abutment connection to select an appropriate abutment in any clinical situation. The long term success of dental implants are affected by various parameters related to the implant-abutment connection such as microgaps, antirotational stability and bacterial leakage. In the present study, we aimed to give information related to the different types of abutments, their shapes, the materials used, and the types of connections that are currently available. This information may help the clinician to simplify a confusing decision related to the selection of abutment.
Keywords: Dental implantation, endosseous; dental implant-abutment design; dental abutments
- Misch CE. Dental Implant Prosthetics. 1st ed. St. Louis Missouri: Mosby; 2005. p.32-41.
- Newman MG, Takei HH, Carranza FA. Carranza?s Clinical Periodontology. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Mosby; 2002. p.28-36.
- Brånemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;50(3):399-410. [Crossref]
- Brånemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindström J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;3(2):81-100. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Aykent F, Özdoğan MS, Soğancı G. [Occlusion of implant supported prostheses]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Prosthodont-Special Topics. 2017;3(1):13-21.
- Hasanreisoğlu U, Oğuz Eİ. [Evaluation of success criteria in implant dentistry]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Prosthodont-Special Topics. 2015;1(2):1-7.
- Binon PP. Implants and components: entering the new millenium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15(1):76-94. [PubMed]
- Krennmair G, Seemann R, Weinländer M, Wegscheider W, Piehslinger E. Implantprosthodontic rehabilitation of anterior partial edentulism: a clinical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(1):1043-50. [PubMed]
- Meng JC, Everts JE, Qian F, Gratton DG. Influence of connection geometry on dynamic micromotion at the implant-abutment interface. Int J Prosthodont. 2007;20(6):623-5. [PubMed]
- Quek HC, Tan KB, Nicholls JI. Load fatigue performance of four implant-abutment interface designs: effect of torque level and implant system. J Prost Dent. 2008;100(1):73-5. [Crossref]
- de Barros Carrilho GP, Dias RP, Elias CN. Comparison of external and internal hex implants? rotational freedom: a pilot study. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(2):165-6. [PubMed]
- Khraisat A, Baqain ZH, Smadi L, Nomura S, Miyakawa O, Elnasser Z. Abutment rotational displacement of external hexagon implant system under lateral cyclic loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2006;8(2):95-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Gracis S, Michalakis K, Vigolo P, Vult von Steyern P, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23 Suppl 6:202-16. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sutter F, Weber HP, Sorenson J, Belser U. The new restorative concept of the ITI implant system: design and engineeering. Int J Periodont Restorat Dent. 1993;13(5):409-31.
- Steinebrunner L, Wolfart S, Ludwig K, Kern M. Implant-abutment interface design affects fatigue and fracture strength of implants. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2008;19(12):1276-84. [Cross - ref] [PubMed]
- Gil FJ, Herrero-Climent M, Lázaro P, Rios JV. Implant-abutment connections: influence of the design on the microgap and their fatigue and fracture behavior of dental implants. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25(7):1825-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Weng D, Nagata MJ, Bosco AF, de Melo LG. Influence of microgap location and configuration on radiographic bone loss around submerged implants: an experimental study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(5):941-6. [PubMed]
- Theoharidou A, Petridis H, Tzannas K, Garefis P. Abutment screw loosening in single-implant restorations: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(4):681-90. [PubMed]
- Linkevicius T, Apse P. Influence of abutment material on stability of peri-implant tissues: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(3):449-56. [PubMed]
- Andreiotelli M, Wenz HJ, Kohal RJ. Are ceramic implants a viable alternative to titanium implants? A systematic literature review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20 Suppl 4:32-47. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kelly JR, Rungruanganunt P. Fatigue behavior of computer-aided design/computer assisted manufacture ceramic abutments as a function of design and ceramic processing. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(2):601-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Conejo J, Kobayashi T, Anadioti E, Blatz MB. Performance of CAD/CAM monolithic ceramic implant-supported restorations bonded to titanium inserts: a systematic review. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017;10 Suppl 1:139-46.
- Fadanelli MA, Amaral FL, Basting RT, Turssi CP, Sotto-Maior BS, França FM. Effect of steam autoclaving on the tensile strength of resin cements used for bonding two-piece zirconia abutments. J Oral Implantol. 2017;43(2):87-93. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Ferrari M, Tricarico MG, Cagidiaco MC, Vichi A, Gherlone EF, Zarone F, et al. 3-year randomized controlled prospective clinical trial on different CAD-CAM implant abutments. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(6):1134-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Adatia ND, Bayne SC, Cooper LF, Thompson JY. Fracture resistance of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental implant abutments. J Prosthodont. 2009;18(1):17-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Glauser R, Sailer I, Wohlwend A, Studer S, Schibli M, Schärer P. Experimental zirconia abutments for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in esthetically demanding regions: 4-year results of a prospective clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(3):285-90.[PubMed]
- Rimondini L, Cerroni L, Carrassi A, Torricelli P. Bacterial colonization of zirconia ceramic surfaces: an in vitro and in vivo study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17(6):793-8. [PubMed]
- Hahnel S, Wieser A, Lang R, Rosentritt M. Biofilm formation on the surface of modern implant abutment materials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(11):1297-301. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Grossmann Y, Madjar D. Prosthetic treatment for severely misaligned implants: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;88(11):259-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Grossmann Y, Pasciuta M, Finger IM. A novel technique using a coded healing abutment for the fabrication of a CAD/CAM titanium abutment for an implant-supported restoration. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95(3):258-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Marchack CB, Vidjak FM, Futatsuki V. A simplified technique to fabricate a custom milled abutment. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98(7):416-7. [Crossref]
- Lee A, Okayasu K, Wang HL. Screw-versus cement-retained implant restoration: current concepts. Implant Dent. 2010;19(1):8-15. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77(1):28-35. [Crossref]
- Wittneben JG, Joda T, Weber HP, Brägger U. Screw retained vs. cement retained implantsupported fixed dental prosthesis. Periodontol 2000. 2017;73(1):141-51. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Nogueira LB, Moura CD, Francischone CE, Valente VS, Alencar SM, Moura WL, et al. Fracture strength of implant-supported ceramic crowns with customized zirconia abutments: a screw retained vs. cement retained. J Prosthodont. 2016;25(1):49-53. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Drago C, Lazzara RJ. Guidelines for implant abutment selection for partially edentulous patients. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010;31(1):14-20. [PubMed]
- Giglio GD. Abutment selection in implant-supported fixed prosthodontics. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1999;19(3):232-41.
- Karunagaran S, Markose S, Paprocki G, Wicks R. A systematic approach to definitive planning and designing single and multiple unit implant abutments. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(8):639-48. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: Process List