01.08.2017 Views

MBR JULY ALL

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Malta Business Review<br />

DENTAL HEALTHCARE<br />

Malta Business Review<br />

ADDRESSING COMPLEX<br />

CASE SCENARIOS!<br />

By Dr Jean Paul Demajo<br />

In today’s dentistry aesthetics are as<br />

important as functionality. Many patients visit<br />

the dentist and tell them how happy they are<br />

that their bridge or implant they had done<br />

many years ago is still doing fine. What they<br />

are unhappy about are the poor aesthetics<br />

they carry. Most of this old dental work is<br />

heavily constructed using old techniques<br />

with possible visible metal. The frontal view<br />

often shows receeded darkened gums by the<br />

thin metal-ceramic edge of the border of the<br />

crown. Spaces appear in between the teeth<br />

and/or implants, again due to gum recession<br />

causing dark shadows and food packing.<br />

Food packing leads to plaque build-up and<br />

inflammation. Yes this may be kept clean but<br />

the aesthetics still leave much to be desired.<br />

The fact remains that in most cases a bridge<br />

or implant looks very good when inserted but<br />

10, 15 or 20years later it looks very poor and<br />

not in-keeping with the rest of the dentition.<br />

OPTIONS FOR TREATMENT<br />

1 Removal of the implant and adjacent tooth<br />

with poor prognosis followed by two new<br />

implants replacing the two missing teeth<br />

and two new crowns<br />

2 Modification of metal collar and provision<br />

of new implant crown<br />

3 Removal of implant and construction of<br />

new all-ceramic bridge in zirconia or lithium<br />

di-silicate replacing both teeth<br />

4 Gingival plastic surgery to cover the metal<br />

collar<br />

This is a tricky case scenario on a patient<br />

with high expectations. Each option<br />

carries advantages and disadvantages.<br />

Understanding that each option may bare a<br />

good but possibly a compromised result, the<br />

patient has opted for option 1. Here is the<br />

sequence of events:<br />

1 Explantation (removal of implant) and<br />

extraction of adjacent central incisor<br />

2 Simultaneous bone and gingival grafting<br />

plus provision of removable prosthesis.<br />

3 Placement of 2 new implants 3months<br />

post-removal of implant and tooth with<br />

further bone augmentation<br />

4 Fitting of new all ceramic intermediate<br />

implant-crown connections followed by<br />

a metal free all-ceramic superstructure<br />

4months post-implantation<br />

Intra-op pre treatment<br />

Intra-op showing two implants and two ceramic connections<br />

The above shows that there are many<br />

solutions to an aesthetic problem. What’s<br />

important is knowing what options are out<br />

there, explaining them to the patient and<br />

selecting the best option to address the<br />

patients wishes. Timeframes and costings<br />

must also be weighed out.<br />

Ask your dentist! <strong>MBR</strong><br />

A CASE SCENARIO<br />

Middle aged man is unhappy<br />

with an implant done<br />

12 years ago<br />

The implant has healed very well<br />

Fully satisfied with performance<br />

of implant but deeply unsatisfied<br />

with current aesthetics<br />

of tooth and gum<br />

Extra-op pre treatment<br />

Extra-op post treatment<br />

DR JEAN PAUL DEMAJO<br />

Dental and Implant Surgeon,<br />

Trained in London working in<br />

private practice in Malta<br />

42 43<br />

www.maltabusinessreview.net

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!