İmplant Üstü Restorasyonlarda Estetiğe Protez Öncesi Yaklaşımlar
Özet
İmplant üstü restorasyonlarda estetik başarı, protez öncesi dönemde cerrahi ve restoratif kriterlerin multidisipliner bir yaklaşımla değerlendirilmesini gerektirir. Estetik bölgedeki anterior implantların başarısı, final restorasyonun komşu dişlerle tam entegrasyonu ve hasta memnuniyeti ile ölçülür; bu süreçte Pembe Estetik Skor (PES) kriterleri ile papilla ve yumuşak doku seviyeleri kritik öneme sahiptir. Optimal estetiğin sağlanması için hastanın gülme hattı, implantın üç boyutlu konumu, dişeti biyotipi ve diş formu gibi diagnostik faktörler titizlikle incelenmelidir. Kalın dişeti biyotipi, doku çekilmesine karşı direnci ve materyalleri maskeleme yeteneği nedeniyle ince biyotipe göre daha avantajlıdır. Papil oluşumu ve korunmasında krestal kemik yüksekliği ile horizontal interproksimal mesafe belirleyici unsurlardır. Cerrahi aşamada, implantın apikokoronal, meziodistal ve fasiolingual olarak ideal konumlandırılması (3x3x3 PIE kuralı) ve bukkal kemiğe en az 2 mm mesafe bırakılması mekanik ve protetik komplikasyonları önler. Diş çekimini takiben immediate veya gecikmiş implant yerleşimi kararı vaka bazlı verilmelidir. Son yıllarda, ince mukoza varlığında titanyumun yansıttığı koyu grimsi rengi önlemek amacıyla biyouyumlu ve diş rengindeki zirkonya materyalleri ile CAD/CAM sistemleri başarıyla tercih edilmektedir.
Esthetic success in implant-supported restorations requires a meticulous multidisciplinary evaluation of surgical and restorative criteria during the pre-prosthetic phase. The achievement of anterior implants in the esthetic zone is measured by the seamless integration of the final restoration with adjacent teeth and overall patient satisfaction, where Pink Esthetic Score (PES) criteria regarding papilla and soft tissue levels are critical. To attain optimal esthetics, diagnostic factors such as the patient's smile line, three-dimensional implant positioning, gingival biotype, and tooth form must be evaluated. A thick gingival biotype is highly preferred over a thin one due to its resistance to mucosal recession and capacity to mask underlying materials. Crestal bone height and horizontal interproximal distance are the decisive components for predictable papilla formation and preservation. In the surgical phase, the correct three-dimensional positioning of the implant (the 3x3x3 PIE rule) and maintaining a minimum of 2 mm of buccal bone thickness prevent mechanical and prosthetic complications. Decisions on immediate or delayed implant placement following extraction should be customized per case. Recently, to prevent the dark grayish shadow of titanium under thin mucosa, biocompatible tooth-colored zirconia materials and CAD/CAM custom abutments are successfully utilized.
Referanslar
Santing HJ, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, et al. Performance of the straumann bone level ımplant system for anterior single-tooth replacements in augmented and nonaugmented sites: A prospective cohort study with 60 consecutive patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(8):941–948. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02486.x
Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:43–61.
Higginbottom F, Belser U, Jones John D, et al. Prosthetic management of implants in the esthetic zone. Int J Oral MaxillofacImplants. 2004;19(7):62–72.
Schiroli G. Single-tooth implant restorations in the esthetic zone wtih pureform ceramic-crowns: 3 Case Reports. J Oral Implantol. 2004;30(6):358–363.
Suphanantachat S, Thovanich K, Nisapakultorn K. The influence of peri-implant mucosal level on the satisfaction with anterior maxillary implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(9):1075–1081. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02268.x
Vetromilla BM, Brondani LP, Pereira-Cenci T, et al. Influence of different implant-abutment connection designs on the mechanical and biological behavior of single-tooth implants in the maxillary esthetic zone: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(3):398-403. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.007
Fürhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T, et al. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16(6):639–644. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.007
Li X, Wu B, Cheng X, et al. Esthetic evaluation of implant-supported single crowns: the implant restoration esthetic index and patient perception. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(1):51–58. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.007
Lin GH, Madi IM. Soft-tissue conditions around dental implants: A literature review. Implant Dent. 2019;28(2):138–143. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.007
Tsai BY. A method for obtaining peri-implant soft-tissue contours by using screw-retained provisional restorations as impression copings: A clinical report. J Oral Implantol. 2011;37(5):605–609. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00026.1
Kourkouta S. Implant therapy in the esthetic zone: smile line assessment. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011;31(2):195–201.
Tjan AH, Miller GD. Some esthetic factors in a smile. J Prosthet Dent. 1984;51(1):24–28. doi: doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(84)80097-9
Forna N, Agop-Forna D. Esthetic aspects in implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. Med Pharm Reports. 2019;92(1):6–13. doi: 10.15386/mpr-1515
Fu JH, Lee A, Wang HL. Influence of tissue biotype on implant esthetics. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(3):499–508.
Chow YC, Wang HL. Factors and techniques influencing peri-implant papillae. Implant Dent. 2010;19(3):208–219. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3181d43bd6
Wang IC, Barootchi S, Tavelli L, et al. The peri-implant phenotype and implant esthetic complications. Contemporary overview. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(1):212–223. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12709
Jung RE, Becker K, Bienz SP, et al. Effect of peri-implant mucosal thickness on esthetic outcomes and the efficacy of soft tissue augmentation procedures: Consensus report of group 2 of the SEPA/DGI/OF workshop. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022;33(S23):100–108. doi: 10.1111/clr.13955
Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Lozada J. Immediate placement and provisionalization of maxillary anterior single implants: 1-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant. 2003;18(1): 31-39.
Nisapakultorn K, Suphanantachat S, Silkosessak O, et al. Factors affecting soft tissue level around anterior maxillary single-tooth implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(6):662–670. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01887.x
Zetu L, Wang HL. Management of inter-dental/inter-implant papilla. J Clin Periodontol. 2005;32(7):831–839. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00748.x
Tarnow DP, Magner AW, Fletcher P. The effect of the distance from the contact point to the crest of bone on the presence or absence of the interproximal dental papilla. J Periodontol. 1992;63(12):995–996. doi: 10.1902/jop.1992.63.12.995
Choquet V, Hermans M, Adriaenssens P, et al. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of the papilla level adjacent to single-tooth dental implants. a retrospective study in the maxillary anterior region. J Periodontol. 2001;72(10):1364–1371. doi: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1364
Tarnow D, Elian N, Fletcher P, et al. Vertical distance from the crest of bone to the height of the interproximal papilla between adjacent implants. J Periodontol. 2003;74(12):1785–1788. doi: 10.1902/jop.2003.74.12.1785
Gastaldo JF, Cury PR, Sendyk WR. Effect of the vertical and horizontal distances between adjacent implants and between a tooth and an implant on the incidence of interproximal papilla. J Periodontol. 2004;75(9):1242–1246. doi: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.9.1242
Kois JC. Predictable single tooth peri-implant esthetics: five diagnostic keys. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2001;22(3):199–206.
Nagaraj KR, Savari RC, Savari AR, et al. Gingival biotype-Prosthodontic perspective. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2010;10(1):27–30. doi: 10.1007/s13191-010-0011-3
Gomez-Meda R, Esquivel J, Blatz MB. The esthetic biological contour concept for implant restoration emergence profile design. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(1):173–184. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12714
Annibali S, Bignozzi I, La Monaca G, et al. Usefulness of the aesthetic result as a success criterion for implant therapy: A review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(1):3–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00234.x
Atieh MA, Alsabeeha NHM. Soft tissue changes after connective tissue grafts around immediately placed and restored dental implants in the esthetic zone: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020;32(3):280–290. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12538
Lewis S, Parel S, Faulkner R. Provisional implant-supported fixed restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;10(3):319–325.
Garabetyan J, Malet J, Kerner S, et al. The relationship between dental implant papilla and dental implant mucosa around single-tooth implant in the esthetic area: A retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30(12):1229–1237. doi: 10.1111/clr.13536
Testori T, Weinstein T, Scutellà F, et al. Implant placement in the esthetic area: criteria for positioning single and multiple implants. Periodontol 2000. 2018;77(1):176–196. doi: 10.1111/clr.13536
Ghahroudi AAR, Rokn AR, Shamshiri AR, et al. Does timing of implant placement affect esthetic results in single-tooth implants? A cohort evaluation based on mPES. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020;32(7):715–725. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12631
Priest GF. The esthetic challenge of adjacent implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(7 SUPPL):2–12. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2007.03.015
Meng HW, Chien EY, Chien HH. Immediate implant placement and provisionalization in the esthetic zone: A 6.5-year follow-up and literature review. Case Rep Dent. 2021; Article ID 4290193. doi: 10.1155/2021/4290193
Block MS, Mercante DE, Lirette D, et al. Prospective evaluation of immediate and delayed provisional single tooth restorations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(11 Suppl):89–107. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.07.009
Ashurko I, Blagushina N, Borodiy A, et al. Hard and soft tissue augmentation with single-implant restoration in the esthetic zone. Case Rep Dent. 2021; Article ID 5737665. doi: 10.1155/2021/5737665
Den Hartog L, Meijer HJA, Stegenga B, et al. Single implants with different neck designs in the aesthetic zone: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(11):1289–1297. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02109.x
Özkurt Z, Kazazoǧlu E. Zirconia dental implants: A literature review. J Oral Implantol. 2011;37(3):367–76. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00079
