Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015:2015:502394.
doi: 10.1155/2015/502394. Epub 2015 Dec 3.

Split-Framework in Mandibular Implant-Supported Prosthesis

Affiliations

Split-Framework in Mandibular Implant-Supported Prosthesis

Danny Omar Mendoza Marin et al. Case Rep Dent. 2015.

Abstract

During oral rehabilitation of an edentulous patient with an implant-supported prosthesis, mandibular flexure must be considered an important biomechanical factor when planning the metal framework design, especially if implants are installed posterior to the interforaminal region. When an edentulous mandible is restored with a fixed implant-supported prosthesis connected by a fixed full-arch framework, mandibular flexure may cause needless stress in the overall restorative system and lead to screw loosening, poor fit of prosthesis, loss of the posterior implant, and patient's discomfort due to deformation properties of the mandible during functional movements. The use of a split-framework could decrease the stress with a precise and passive fit on the implants and restore a more natural functional condition of the mandible, helping in the longevity of the prosthesis. Therefore, the present clinical report describes the oral rehabilitation of an edentulous patient by a mandibular fixed implant-supported prosthesis with a split-framework to compensate for mandibular flexure. Clinical Significance. The present clinical report shows that the use of a split-framework reduced the risk of loss of the posterior implants or screws loosening with acceptable patient comfort over the period of a year. The split-framework might have compensated for the mandibular flexure during functional activities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Initial aspect of the patient before treatment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Impression of the abutments with the impression coping after extraction of the remaining teeth of the mandible.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Splitting of the framework with a carborundum disc.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Installation of mandibular implant-supported prosthesis.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Panoramic radiograph after a year of installation of the mandibular fixed implant-supported prosthesis. Red arrows show the cuts in framework.

References

    1. Zarone F., Apicella A., Nicolais L., Aversa R., Sorrentino R. Mandibular flexure and stress build-up in mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2003;14(1):103–114. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.140114.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rangert B., Jemt T., Jörneus L. Forces and moments on Branemark implants. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 1989;4(3):241–247. - PubMed
    1. Apicella A., Masi E., Nicolais L., Zarone F., de Rosa N., Valletta G. A finite-element model study of occlusal schemes in full-arch implant restoration. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine. 1998;9(4):191–196. doi: 10.1023/a:1008879922207. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brånemark P. I., Zarb G. A., Albrektsson T. Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago, Ill, USA: Quintessence Publishing; 1985.
    1. Tashkandi E. A., Lang B. R., Edge M. J. Analysis of strain at selected bone sites of a cantilevered implant-supported prosthesis. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1996;76(2):158–164. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(96)90300-5. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources