Consideration of Minimal Interocclusal Distance for Implant-supported Prosthesis

Seungmin Kim; Sun-Ho Choe; Young-Woo Song; Joo-Hyun Kang; Jae-Kook Cha; Jung-Seok Lee; YoungBum Park; Ui-Won Jung

doi:10.32542/implantology.20170005

All Issue

2017 Vol.21, Issue 1 Preview Page

Consideration of Minimal Interocclusal Distance for Implant-supported Prosthesis 임플란트 고정성 보철물 수복을 위한 최소 교합 고경에 대한 고찰

March 2017. pp. 54-64

PDF XML

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this review is to exmanine the minimal interocclusal distance required for implant placement for each implant manufacturer without surgery.

Materials and methods: “Minimal interocclusal distance” was defined as the distance from the edentulous alveolar crest to the functional cusp of the opposing teeth or to the contact surface facing the central fossa of implant prosthesis. 15 journals were searched by “Pubmed”, and specifications were inquired by manufacturer.

Result: Implants were classified into bone level and soft-tissue level implant. The bone level was divided into external connection type and internal connection type. Implants were categorized into cement-retention type and screw-retention type according to the fastening method of the prosthesis. For the cement-retention type, the bone level implant required 6 mm interocclusal distance and the soft-tissue level implant 8 mm, regardless of manufacturer. For the screw- retention type, minimal interocclusal distance were 1.5~4.5 mm for internal connection type, 3.65~4.5 mm for external connection type, 4.3~6.5 mm soft-tissue level implant.

Conclusion: There were differences in each manufacturer, but implantation can be performed when the minimum interocclusal distance of 1.5 mm is secured.

Keywords

Implant

Implant prosthesis

Interocclusal distance

Minimal interocclusal distance

References

Petridis HP, Tsiggos N, Michail A, et al. Three-dimensional positional changes of teeth adjacent to posterior edentulous spaces in relation to age at time of tooth loss and elapsed time. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2010; 18: 78-83.

20698422

Shugars DA, Bader JD, Phillips SW, Jr., et al. The consequences of not replacing a missing posterior tooth. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000; 131: 1317-1323.

10.14219/jada.archive.2000.038510986832

Craddock HL, Youngson CC. A study of the incidence of overeruption and occlusal interferences in unopposed posterior teeth. Br Dent J. 2004; 196: 341-348; discussion 337.

10.1038/sj.bdj.481108215044991

Craddock HL, Youngson CC, Manogue M, et al. Occlusal changes following posterior tooth loss in adults. Part 1: a study of clinical parameters associated with the extent and type of supraeruption in unopposed posterior teeth. J Prosthodont. 2007; 16: 485-494.

10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00212.x17559530

Craddock HL. Occlusal changes following posterior tooth loss in adults. Part 3. A study of clinical parameters associated with the presence of occlusal interferences following posterior tooth loss. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17: 25-30.

17927736

Giglio GD. Abutment selection in implant-supported fixed prosthodontics. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1999; 19: 233-241.

10635169

Misch CE, Goodacre CJ, Finley JM, et al. Consensus conference panel report: crown-height space guidelines for implant dentistry-part 1. Implant Dent. 2005; 14: 312-318.

10.1097/01.id.0000188375.76066.2316361879

Misch CE, Goodacre CJ, Finley JM, et al. Consensus conference panel report: crown-height space guidelines for implant dentistry-part 2. Implant Dent. 2006; 15: 113-121.

10.1097/01.id.0000217907.18396.1816766892

McGarry TJ, Nimmo A, Skiba JF, et al. Classification system for partial edentulism. J Prosthodont. 2002; 11: 181-193.

10.1053/jopr.2002.12609412237799

Karunagaran S, Markose S, Paprocki G, et al. A systematic approach to definitive planning and designing single and multiple unit implant abutments. J Prosthodont. 2014; 23: 639-648.

10.1111/jopr.1216124916855

Lee HE, Lee KT, Tseng YC, et al. Interdisciplinary management of unfavorable posterior intermaxillary space. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 46: 413-415.

10.1016/j.bjoms.2007.10.00918420318

Meningaud JP, Pitak-Arnnop P, Corcos L, et al. Posterior maxillary segmental osteotomy for mandibular implants placement: case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 102: e1-3.

10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.03.01317052616

Cochran DL, Hermann JS, Schenk RK, et al. Biologic width around titanium implants. A histometric analysis of the implanto-gingival junction around unloaded and loaded nonsubmerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 1997; 68: 186-198.

10.1902/jop.1997.68.2.1869058338

Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest. J Periodontol. 2000; 71: 546-549.

10.1902/jop.2000.71.4.54610807116

Linkevicius T, Apse P. Biologic width around implants. An evidence-based review. Stomatologija. 2008; 10: 27-35.

18493163

Information

Publisher :The Korean Academy of Oral & Maxillofacial Implantology
Publisher(Ko) :대한구강악안면임플란트학회
Journal Title :Implantology
Journal Title(Ko) :대한구강악안면임플란트학회지
Volume : 21
No :1
Pages :54-64
Received Date : 2017-03-10
Revised Date : 2017-03-30
Accepted Date : 2017-03-31
DOI :https://doi.org/10.32542/implantology.20170005

Journal of implantology and applied sciences ISSN:2765-7833(Print) 2765-7841(Online) 대한구강악안면임플란트학회지

All Issue