Treatment planning of the edentulous maxilla

Abstract

The predictability of successful osseointegrated implant rehabilitation of the edentulous jaw as described by Branemark et al., 1 introduced a new era of management for the edentulous predicament. Implant rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla remains one of the most complex restorative challenges because of the number of variables that affect both the aesthetic and functional aspect of the prosthesis. 2 Among the prosthesis designs used to treat the edentulous maxilla are fixed or removable implant-supported restorations. Since the aesthetic requirements and preoperative situation of each patient varies, considerable time must be spent on accurate diagnosis to ensure patient desires are satisfied and predictable outcomes are achieved. The purpose of this article is to compare the treatment options and prosthesis designs for the edentulous maxilla. Emphasis will be placed on diagnosis and treatment planning. Criteria will be given to guide the practitioner in deciding whether a fixed or removable restoration should be placed. This objective will be accomplished through the review of cases with regard to varying design considerations and factors that influence the decision-making process.

Title: “Kelly’s Syndrome”- prevention, using Implant Supported Hybrid Denture: Clinical Considerations and Case Report with 5 year follow up.

“…[9] The phenomenon of residual ridge resorption (RRR) following removal of teeth has been well observed and documented in literature. [10,11] While the bone loss following the removal of teeth is stated to be rapid, progressive, irreversible and inevitable, it is equally well observed that bone is maintained around standing teeth and implants.…”

The Application of an Artificial Neural Network to Support Decision Making in Edentulous Maxillary Implant Prostheses

“…Since, as the number of input factors increases, the number of cases required for teaching the ANN also increases, the collected data were presented to two expert prosthodontists, both of whom were faculty members with more than 10 years of experience in implant dentistry. They were asked to address the specific factors that affect their decision on the final prosthetic design for each patient with consideration of the standards presented by Misch (2005), Zitzman (2000), and Jivraj et al (2006). The number of factors was then limited to the most relevant ten; and factors such as implant length and demographic data were omitted.…”

“…Records with incomplete data regarding patient examination or surgical procedure (2000), and Jivraj et al (2006) discussed an average of 15 factors that should be considered regarding the treatment planning of an edentulous maxilla with dental implants. The priorities of each factor (weighting) in the treatment-planning sequences were not initially determined accurately.…”

Evidence‐Based Criteria for Differential Treatment Planning of Implant Restorations for the Maxillary Edentulous Patient

“…34, 161 However, both surgical and prosthodontic acumen is required, since the implants must be congruent with the crowns, and the creation of a natural morphology of the tooth/tissue junction is rigorous. Complete fixed, segmented rehabilitations supported by 6 to 8 rough surface implants have been documented in a review with a 96.4% prosthodontic survival rate at the 10-year endpoint.…”