As the population ages and life expectancy increases, clinicians today find themselves in the wake of an ever-growing demand for high-quality aesthetic dental treatment, by increasingly informed patients. The long-term success of both cosmetic and restorative dentistry is dependent on well designed restorations and the health of the periodontal tissues. Overhanging restorations, full crown restorations with poor marginal fit, and implant-supported prosthetics with inadequate hygiene access all increase the risk for periodontal sequelae and interproximal caries.
When planning restorative treatment, consideration should be given to the restorative design, the need for hygiene access and the location of intended implants. In addition, the patient's manual dexterity and ability to manipulate oral hygiene aids is a crucial consideration, as is adequate access for the hygienist to manually debride and maintain the restorations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrunsvoldMA, LaneJJ. The prevalence of overhanging dental restorations and their relationship to periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol1990 Feb;17(2):67–72.
2.
GrossM.Clinical dilemmas: restoration of posterior quadrants in the partially edentulous dentition – 9-year retrospective cumulative study. Warsaw, IN: Zimmer Dental; 2013. Available at: http://www.zimmerdental.co.uk/Library/lib_artGross.aspx Accessed: 28 Dec 2013.
3.
TurkunLS, TurkunM.The effect of one-step polishing system on the surface roughness of three esthetic resin composite materials. Oper Dent2004;29(2):203–211.
4.
MopperKW. How do composite resins stand the test of time?Dent Today2004;23(5):74–79.
5.
JefferiesSR. Abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative dentistry: a state-of-the-art review. Dent Clin North Am2007;51(2):379–397.
6.
IkedaM, MartinK, NikaidoT, FoxtonRM, TagamiJ.Effect of surface characteristics on adherence of S. mutans biofilms to indirect resin composites. Dent Mater J2007;26(6):915–923.
7.
KantorskiKZ, ScottiR, ValandroLF, BottinoMA, Koga-ItoCY, JorgeAO. Adherence of Streptococcus mutans to uncoated and saliva-coated glass-ceramics and composites. Gen Dent2008:56(7)740–747.
Rodriguez-FerrerHJ, StrahanJD, NewmanHN. Effect of gingival health of removing overhanging margins of interproximal subgingival amalgam restorations. J Clin Periodontol1980;7(6):457–62.
10.
ShenoyA, ShenoyN, BabannavarR.Periodontal considerations determining the design and location of margins in restorative dentistry. J Interdiscip Dentistry2012;2:3–10.
11.
ReitemeierB, HänselK, WalterMH, KastnerC, ToutenburgH.Effect of posterior crown margin placement on gingival health. J Prosthet Dent2002;87(2):167–72.
12.
WaerhaugJ.Healing of the dento-epithelial junction following subgingival plaque control. II: As observed on extracted teeth. J Periodontol1978;49:119–34.
13.
ValderhaugJ, BirkelandJM. Periodontal conditions in patients 5 years following insertion of fixed prostheses. Pocket depth and loss of attachment. J Oral Rehabil1976;3:237–43.
BerglundhT, ZitzmannN, DonatiM.Are peri-implantitis lesions different from periodontitis lesions?J Clin Periodontol2011;38(suppl.11):188–202.
21.
SalviGE, AgliettaM, EickS, SculeanA, LangNP, RamseierCA. Reversibility of experimental peri-implant mucositis compared with experimental gingivitis in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res2012;23:182–190.
22.
SerinoG, StromC.Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: Association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Implants Res2009;20:169–174.
23.
MoscovitchM.Molar restorations supported by 2 implants: an alternative to wide implants. J Can Dent Assoc2001;67(9):535–9
24.
GravesSL, JansenCE, SiddiquiAA, BeatyKD. Wide diameter implants: indications, considerations and preliminary results over a two-year period. Aust Prosthodont J1994; 8:31–7.
25.
CrollBM. Emergence profiles in natural tooth contour. Part II: Clinical considerations. J Prosthetic Dent1990;63(4):374–379.
26.
O'MahonyA, MacNeillSR, CobbCM: Design features that may influence bacterial plaque retention: A retrospective analysis of failed implants. Quintessence G Int2000;31:249–256
27.
EissmannHF, RadkeRA, NobelWH. Physiologic design criteria for fixed dental restoration. Dent Clin North Am1971;4:5543–568.
28.
JohnsonGK, LearyJM. Pontic design and localized ridge augmentation in fixed partial denture design. Dent Clin North Am1992;36(3):591–605.
29.
SaliernoC: The implant dilemma. Registered Dental Hygienist2012;32(6):28–32.
30.
CavazosE.Tissue response to fixed partial pontics. J Prosthet Dent1968;20:143–153.
31.
LiuCL. Use of a modified ovate pontic in areas of ridge defects: a report of two cases. J Esthet Restor Dent2004;16:273–281.
32.
WilsonTGJr.The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: A prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol2009;80:1388–1392.
33.
WadhwaniC, HessT, FaberT, PiñeyroA, ChenCSK. A descriptive study of the radiographic density of implant restorative cements. J Prosthet Dent2010;103:295–302.
34.
DumbrigueHB, AbanomiAA, ChengLL. Techniques to minimize excess luting agent in cement-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent2002;87(1):112–114.
35.
LinkeviciusT, PuisysA, VindasiuteE, LinkevicieneL, ApseP.Does residual cement around implant-supported restorations cause peri-implant disease?A retrospective case analysis. Clin Oral Impl Res2013;24:1179–1184.
36.
MaximoMB, de MendoncaAC, SantosRV, FigueiredoLC, FeresM, DuartePM. Short-term clinical and microbiological evaluations of peri-implant diseases before and after mechanical anti-infective therapies. Clin Oral Implants Res2009;20:99–108.
37.
PaulettoN, LahiffeBJ, WaltonJN. Complications associated with excess cement around crowns on osseointegrated implants: A clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.1999;14(6):865–868.
38.
ShapoffCA, BrentJL. Crestal bone loss and the consequences of retained excess cement around dental implants. Compend Contin Educ Dent2012;33(2):94–6,98–101.
