Esthetic Rehabilitation of Retained Primary Teeth—A Conservative Approach

Gré, C.P.; Bona, Vitor Schweigert; Lise, Diogo Pedrollo; Júnior, Sylvio Monteiro

doi:10.1111/jopr.12602

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Treatment in young patients should follow the most conservative approach as possible. Ideally, therapy for partial anodontia should preserve the primary teeth if the conditions of their roots are good . As both cases illustrated, the roots of the primary lateral incisors showed signs of resorption and were judged to have poor prognosis in the medium term.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agenesis of a maxillary lateral incisor associated with bilateral canine inclusions: A noninvasive multidisciplinary approach

Savi

Crescini

Manfredi

et al. 2019

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The treatment of congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors is often complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach, which demands continuous collaboration among the different specialists involved in the rehabilitation. In young patients, implant therapy or the preparation of intact teeth for fixed prostheses is not indicated. Clinical Considerations Two complex cases of double maxillary canine inclusion were treated with combined surgical, orthodontic, and conservative prosthetic treatments. Orthodontic therapy allowed the creation of the necessary interocclusal space to fabricate the all‐ceramic resin‐bonded fixed partial dentures without the preparation of the abutment teeth. Conclusions Carefully planned and meticulously executed orthodontic and prosthetic therapies allowed for a noninvasive rehabilitation of patients with maxillary lateral incisor agenesis. Clinical Significance This article provides clinicians with a noninvasive solution for agenesis of lateral incisors associated with canine inclusions. Indications for the choice of material of all‐ceramic resin‐bonded fixed partial dentures are discussed and presented.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…serve the primary teeth if the conditions of their roots are good. 25,26 As both cases illustrated, the roots of the primary lateral incisors showed signs of resorption and were judged to have poor prognosis in the medium term.…”

Section: Clinical Reportmentioning

confidence: 92%

Agenesis of a maxillary lateral incisor associated with bilateral canine inclusions: A noninvasive multidisciplinary approach

Savi

Crescini

Manfredi

et al. 2019

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Primary tooth supported restorative treatment planning presents an exceptional challenge [ 3 ] and should take into consideration alterations of tooth morphology [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Teeth deficiency may cause unfavorable restriction of bone structure, leading to an additional complication of implant supported restorations [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary Teeth Supported Fixed Prosthesis—A Predictable Treatment Alternative

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Individuals with tooth agenesis often present a significant clinical challenge for dental practitioners. This retrospective study evaluated clinical and radiological long-term functional and esthetic outcomes following restoration using primary teeth to support fixed all-ceramic prosthesis in patients with teeth agenesis. Methods: Patients with teeth agenesis and at least one year follow-up were included. Examinations included panoramic X-ray, clinical examination and family history records. Only primary teeth without permanent teeth underneath were chosen. All ceramic fixed restorations were used. All data were collected from patient files. Outcome parameters included: restoration parameters (restoration survival, restoration fractures, restoration detachment, restoration replacement, and secondary caries), plaque index, and gingival index. Results: The study included 58 porcelain restorations inserted in 25 individuals; mean age 12 ± 2.1 years (range 10–19 years); mean number of missing teeth 12.3 ± 9 (range 6–12). Mean follow-up 48±6 months (range 12–60 months). All restorations survived up to last follow-up, rendering a survival rate of 100%. Restorations outcome – porcelain chipping (9%), detachment (2%), no restoration replacement nor secondary caries, mean gingival index - 0.7 ± 0.5 and mean plaque index - 0.9 ± 0.3. Conclusions: In tooth agenesis, restoration using primary teeth to support fixed all-ceramic prosthesis is a viable treatment alternative.

show abstract

“…Composite resins are more consistent with the concept of minimally invasive dentistry compared to ceramic veneers. They are relatively easy to use, they lower clinical time without a laboratory step, and they are also cost-effective [1,13,16]. Some disadvantages of composite resins include their color instability, inherent polymerization shrinkage, increased water sorption which can lead to a decrease in wear resistance, and they can also cause post-operative hypersensitivity [1,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the preferred restorative material – composite resin or ceramic – for anterior teeth restoration

Schünemann

Valmorbida

Bernardon

2019

RSBO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and objective: To evaluate the perception of clinicians and undergraduate students concerning their preferences and experience in using composite resin and ceramic veneers to restore anterior teeth restorations. Material and methods: 60 participants including clinicians (n=30) and undergraduate students (n=30) volunteered for this study. The study consisted of two parts. Firstly, the participant answered questions about their use and possible failure of ceramic or composite resin for anterior teeth. In thesecond part, participants analyzed 3 photographs of the anterior smile and reported on the presence of healthy teeth or restored teeth, with composite resin or ceramic veneers. Results: For both groups, composite resin was frequently used over ceramic and the most important reported factor in this decision choice was the cost factor. Both groups presented a failure percentage higher than 50% for composite resin, and this percentage was higher forundergraduate students. In the visual analysis of the photographs, none of the participants identified all the restorations correctly. Conclusion: Composite resin is the most common material of choice for clinicians and undergraduate students. Distinguishing natural teeth from restored teeth has become increasingly difficult, despite the restorative material (composite resin or ceramic) used.

show abstract

Esthetic Rehabilitation of Retained Primary Teeth—A Conservative Approach

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Agenesis of a maxillary lateral incisor associated with bilateral canine inclusions: A noninvasive multidisciplinary approach

Agenesis of a maxillary lateral incisor associated with bilateral canine inclusions: A noninvasive multidisciplinary approach

Primary Teeth Supported Fixed Prosthesis—A Predictable Treatment Alternative

Assessment of the preferred restorative material – composite resin or ceramic – for anterior teeth restoration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About