implant supported fixed bridge

This patient has decided to have his upper maxillary incisors removed following a significant dental history that includes endodontic treatment, clinical crown lengthening, full coverage restorations and trauma. (Fig. 1)

Certainly, there are several restorative options available for treatment: tooth supported fixed bridge, dental implant supported fixed bridge, individual dental implant supported restorations, removable partial denture and of course – no treatment. When there are several options available, it is really our responsibility to help the patient make the decisions on the options available based on their unique situation and circumstances. Let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that the patient is interested in a dental implant supported fixed bridge restoration in the anterior maxillary segment. What would you like to know based on what you see in the clinical photo?

A couple thoughts before we discuss the implant supported fixed bridge option...

Fresh extraction sites visible in the photos certainly lead us to the question whether or not the labial plate of bone is intact or fractured for each of the incisors. Will augmentation or grafting be indicated? If so, how will that impact the provisional restoration? What about lip length and lip mobility – particularly as it pertains to gingival display? What characteristics are you looking for in an implant system that could help with the restorative treatment goals?

Back to the dental implant supported fixed bridge – there are several options available. Two dental implants could be placed in each of the lateral incisor positions (7 and 10), or the central incisor positions (8 and 9), or an alternating scenario that includes a lateral incisor position and a central incisor position (7 and 9, for example).

In an article by Correa1, the effect of implant position on the displacement of the prosthetic structure, as well as the displacement of the supporting bone, was studied at forces applicable to the anterior maxilla. The least displacement of the implant supported fixed bridge was with the implants in the central incisor positions – although it appears as if the flexure was shown to be concentrated in the supporting alveolar structures.

implant supported fixed bridge

Many times we are thinking about the thickness of tissue in a pontic site versus an area with a dental implant supported restoration. Other times a concern arises as to the labio-lingual thickness of bone in the lateral incisor positions or, with the “wagon wheel” effect, if the implants can be placed close enough to the canines to truly be in the lateral incisor position instead of the interproximal space between the laterals and the centrals. (Fig. 2) In other scenarios, dental implants in the central incisor position could be palatally-oriented to a point that could affect cervical contours and speech sounds. In terms of restorative flexibility, where would you like to see the implants placed to facilitate the option for either – natural gingival tissue or prosthetic pink ‘tissue’?

Douglas G. Benting, DDS, MS, FACP, Spear Visiting Faculty and Contributing Author. [ www.drbenting.com ]

Reference

  1. Correa, et. al. Mechanical behavior of dental implants in different positions in the rehabilitation of the anterior maxilla. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 111(4):301-309; 2014.

 


Post a Comment

Comments

Commenter's Profile Image Greg Phillips
September 5th, 2014
Doug, as you know, there is a lot to consider in a replacing teeth in the esthetic zone. We need more information such as periodontal status and an Esthetic Risk Analysis (Martin WC, et al. ITI Treatment Guide, Vol 1, 2006) which is determined by the patient’s medical status, smoking habits, expectations, smile line, gingival phenotype, tooth shape, presence or absence of infection, bone levels at the proximal teeth, width of the edentulous space, soft tissue anatomy and bony anatomy at the osseous crest. This case is both surgically and restoratively Complex, as defined by the SAC Classification system (Dawson A, Chen S. The SCA Classification in Implant Dentistry). With all that being said, assuming you proceed with an implant supported FPD, I would consider implants in the lateral incisor positions; Straumann Roxolid 3.3mm narrow connection bone level implants should be plenty strong enough to support a FPD and allow the surgeon to place them in the appropriate position close enough to the canines to allow for correct embrasures between the laterals and centrals. From what I can tell from the 1 photo is that the gingiva appears to be fairly thick, therefore, if the facial plate was intact, I would have placed the implants immediately with hard and soft tissue augmentation. If the facial plate was not intact, a ridge augmentation would be performed at the time of extraction.
Commenter's Profile Image Matt
April 28th, 2015
Thank you for writing this article. I am a patient trying to gather as much information as I can for a needed implant and restoration procedure. I need implants for positions 8, 9, 10 & 11. I will be getting an implant support fixed bridge. My dentist is recommending an implant at sites 8 & 11 for the 4 unit bridge. My question is if 2 implants are sufficient to support the loading on anterior teeth that will be used for biting, such as eating pizza or biting into an apple. Also, would you agree that positions 8 and 11 are the best sites for placing the implants? From the Correa article you referenced, it was stated that the central incisor positions were the ideal implant sites? Would this apply in my case? Thanks for any information and insight you can provide.