Fp1 Prosthesis in Maxillary Ridge Defect and Fixed Partial Denture in Mandibular Ridge Defect - A Case Report

Ashish. R. Jain^1,

¹Department of Prosthodontics, Tagore Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, India

Cite this paper:
Ashish. R. Jain. Fp1 Prosthesis in Maxillary Ridge Defect and Fixed Partial Denture in Mandibular Ridge Defect - A Case Report. International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2014; 2(6):184-189. doi: 10.12691/ijdsr-2-6-16

Abstract

Severely resorbed alveolar ridge in aesthetic zone of maxilla and mandible can compromise the successful implant placement and aesthetic outcome. Advancements in the field of dental implant therapy have lead to predictable survival rates of dental implants. The current definition of success in addition to long-term predictability, function and integration of the implant focuses on esthetic considerations. This article presents a case report of severely deficient maxillary and mandibular alveolar ridge where implant placement in the Maxillary aesthetic zone has been done in a staged approach as there was inadequate supporting bone and soft tissue and a conventional fixed partial denture in mandibular anterior region.

Keywords:
conventional FPD implant retained fixed Fp-1 prosthesis Bone Grafting

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Henry PJ. A review of guidelines for implant rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 281-8.
[2]	Kelly E. Changes caused by a mandibular removable partial denture opposing a maxillary complete denture. J Prosthet Dent 1972; 27: 140-50.
[3]	Barber HD, Scott RF, Maxson BB, Fonseca RJ. Evaluation of anterior maxillary alveolar ridge resorption when opposed by the transmandibularimplant. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990; 48: 1283-7.
[4]	Lechner SK, Mammen A. Combination syndrome in relation to osseointegratedimplant-supported overdentures: a survey. Int J Prosthodont 1996; 9: 58-64.
[5]	Nevalainen MJ, Rantanen T, Närhi T, Ainamo A. Complete dentures inthe prosthetic rehabilitation of the elderly persons: five different criteria to evaluate the need for replacement. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24: 251-8.
[6]	Kleis WK, Kämmerer PW, Hartmann S, Al-Nawas B, Wagner W. A comparison of three different attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: One-year report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010; 12: 209-18.
[7]	Mericske-Stern R. Treatment outcomes with implant-supported overdentures: Clinical considerations. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:66-73.
[8]	Kent G, Johns R. Effects of osseointegrated implants on psychological and social well-being: a comparison with replacement removable prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994; 9: 103-6.
[9]	Stafford D, Glantz PO, Lindqvist L, Strandman E. Influence of treatment with osseointegrated mandibular bridges on the clinical deformation of maxillary complete dentures. Swed Dent J Suppl 1985; 28: 117-35.