Course Objectives (2 CE Credits)
The replacement of missing mandibular molars with single-tooth, implant-borne restorations provides many benefits over fixed partial dentures, and is by far the most common indication for implant treatment, according to laboratory statistics. Dr. Bradley Bockhorst offers a detailed walkthrough of the process by which the Inclusive® Tooth Replacement System (Glidewell Laboratories) can be used to simplify the restorative process and provide a predictable, esthetic restoration. Topics include:
- Distortion factors with conventional radiography
- Using cone beam CT to precisely map the mandibular canal
- Virtual implant placement with digital treatment planning
- Overall drill lengths and osteotomy depth
- The difference between a prosthetic guide and a surgical guide
- The advantages of a custom healing abutment
- Immediate custom temporization (cement- or screw-retained)
- Impression procedure with a custom impression coping
- Delivery of final custom abutment and crown (cement- or screw-retained)
While the prosthetic rehabilitation of full-arch cases provides a tremendous service for the patient, and can be professionally rewarding for the clinician, single-tooth replacement is by far the most common implant restoration. Restoring single posterior teeth with implants provides a viable treatment option and has been well-documented in the dental literature. With case planning from a prosthetic perspective and custom temporary components for patient-specific tissue management, the Inclusive Tooth Replacement System is ideally suited to providing a predictable restoration for this common indication.
CAUTION: When viewing the techniques, procedures, theories and materials that are presented, you must make your own decisions about specific treatment for patients and exercise personal professional judgment regarding the need for further clinical testing or education and your own clinical expertise before trying to implement new procedures.
- Becker W, Becker BE. Replacement of maxillary and mandibular molars with single endosseous implant restorations: a retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 1995 Jul;74(1):51-5.
- Misch CE, Misch-Dietsh F, Silc J, Barboza E, Cianciola LJ, Kazor C. Posterior implant single-tooth replacement and status of adjacent teeth during a 10-year period: a retrospective report. J Periodontol. 2008 Dec;79(12):2378-82.
- Misch CE. Endosteal implants for posterior single tooth replacement: alternatives, indications, contraindications, and limitations. J Oral Implantol. 1999;25(2):80-94.
- Ekfeldt A, Carlsson GE, Börjesson G. Clinical evaluation of single-tooth restorations supported by osseointegrated implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994 Mar-Apr;9(2):179-83.
- Muftu A, Chapman RJ. Replacing posterior teeth with freestanding implants: four-year prosthodontic results of a prospective study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 Aug;129(8):1097-102.
- Jansen C. Presentation given at the Academy of Osseointegration 2012 Annual Meeting, Phoenix, Ariz.
- Anderson LC, Kosinski TF, Mentag PJ. A review of the intraosseous course of the nerves of the mandible. J Oral Implantol. 1991;17(4):394-403.
- Alhassani AA, AlGhamdi AS. Inferior alveolar nerve injury in implant dentistry: diagnosis, causes, prevention, and management. J Oral Implantol. 2010;36(5):401-7.