Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/fonts/TeX/fontdata.js

Journal List > Restor Dent Endod > v.45(1) > 1142557

TOOLS
Heo, Lee, Kim, Cho, and 1: Fiber-reinforced composite resin bridges: an alternative method to treat root-fractured teeth
Case Report

Restor Dent Endod 2020;45(1):e8.

Published online: 4 February 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2018.45.e8

Fiber-reinforced composite resin bridges: an alternative method to treat root-fractured teeth

Gun Heo1, Eun-Hye Lee2, Jin-Woo Kim1, Kyung-Mo Cho1, Se-Hee Park 11, *

1Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, Korea

2Department of Conservative Dentistry, Hanyang University Seoul Hospital, Seoul, Korea

*Correspondence to Se-Hee Park, PhD Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University, 7 Jukheon-gil, Gangneung 25457, Korea. E-mail: drendo@gwnu.ac.kr

Received 6 August 2019       Revised 1 October 2019       Accepted 10 October 2019

Copyright © 2020 The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The replacement of missing teeth, especially in the anterior region, is an essential part of dental practice. Fiber-reinforced composite resin bridges are a conservative alternative to conventional fixed dental prostheses or implants. It is a minimally invasive, reversible technique that can be completed in a single visit. The two cases presented herein exemplify the treatment of root-fractured anterior teeth with a natural pontic immediately after extraction.

Go to : Goto

Keywords: Bridges, Fiber-reinforced composite, Immediate restoration, Root fracture

References

1. Kim H, Song MJ, Shin SJ, Lee Y, Park JW. Esthetic rehabilitation of single anterior edentulous space using fiber-reinforced composite. Restor Dent Endod. 2014; 39:220–225.
crossref
2. Kumar KP, Nujella SK, Gopal SS, Roy KK. Immediate esthetic rehabilitation of periodontally compromised anterior tooth using natural tooth as pontic. Case Rep Dent. 2016; 2016:8130352.
crossref
3. Kermanshah H, Motevasselian F. Immediate tooth replacement using fiber-reinforced composite and natural tooth pontic. Oper Dent. 2010; 35:238–245.
crossref
4. Khetarpal A, Talwar S, Verma M. Creating a single-visit, fibre-reinforced, composite resin bridge by using a natural tooth pontic: a viable alternative to a PFM bridge. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013; 7:772–775.
crossref
5. Vallittu PK, Shinya A, Baraba A, Kerr I, Keulemans F, Kreulen C, Lassila L, Malmstrom H, Novotny R, Peumans M, Van Rensburg J, Wolff D, Özcan M. Fiber-reinforced composites in fixed prosthodontics-Quo vadis? Dent Mater. 2017; 33:877–879.
6. Frese C, Schiller P, Staehle HJ, Wolff D. Fiber-reinforced composite fixed dental prostheses in the anterior area: a 4.5-year follow-up. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112:143–149.
crossref
7. Ahmed KE, Li KY, Murray CA. Longevity of fiber-reinforced composite fixed partial dentures (FRC FPD)-systematic review. J Dent. 2017; 61:1–11.
crossref
8. Kumbuloglu O, Özcan M. Clinical survival of indirect, anterior 3-unit surface-retained fibre-reinforced composite fixed dental prosthesis: up to 7.5-years follow-up. J Dent. 2015; 43:656–663.
crossref
9. Van der Weijden F, Dell'Acqua F, Slot DE. Alveolar bone dimensional changes of post-extraction sockets in humans: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2009; 36:1048–1058.
crossref
10. Spear FM, Cooney JP. Restorative interrelationships. Newman M, Takei H, Klokkevold P, Carranza F, editors. editors.Carranza's clinical periodontology. 12th ed.St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier;2014. Chapter 67.
11. Steigmann M, Cooke J, Wang HL. Use of the natural tooth for soft tissue development: a case series. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007; 27:603–608.
12. Perea-Lowery L, Vallittu PK. Framework design and pontics of fiber-reinforced composite fixed dental prostheses – an overview. J Prosthodont Res. 2018; 62:281–286.
crossref
13. Xie Q, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. Comparison of load-bearing capacity of direct resin-bonded fiber-reinforced composite FPDs with four framework designs. J Dent. 2007; 35:578–582.
crossref
14. Malmstrom H, Dellanzo-Savu A, Xiao J, Feng C, Jabeen A, Romero M, Huang J, Ren Y, Yunker MA. Success, clinical performance and patient satisfaction of direct fibre-reinforced composite fixed partial dentures – a two-year clinical study. J Oral Rehabil. 2015; 42:906–913.
crossref
15. Perea L, Matinlinna JP, Tolvanen M, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. Fiber-reinforced composite fixed dental prostheses with various pontics. J Adhes Dent. 2014; 16:161–168.
16. Aktas G, Basara EG, Sahin E, Uctasli S, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Effects of different cavity designs on fracture load of fiber-reinforced adhesive fixed dental prostheses in the anterior region. J Adhes Dent. 2013; 15:131–135.
Go to : Goto

rde-45-e8f1.tif
Figure 1.
Preoperative view. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view); (C) periapical view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f2.tif
Figure 2.
A black dot was made to mark the gingiva level. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view).
undefined
rde-45-e8f3.tif
Figure 3.
Extracted retained root.
undefined
rde-45-e8f4.tif
Figure 4.
Coronal fragment of tooth #41 as a natural tooth pontic. (A, D) Extracted coronal fragment; (B, E) prepared coronal fragment; (C, F) polished coronal fragment; (A-C) lingual view; (D-F) labial view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f5.tif
Figure 5.
Labial view after temporary fixation.
undefined
rde-45-e8f6.tif
Figure 6.
Lingual view of tooth preparation. (A) Preparation of space for fiber extending from the mesial aspect of tooth #42 to the distal aspect of tooth #31 across tooth #41; (B) measurement of the span using a Wedjet.
undefined
rde-45-e8f7.tif
Figure 7.
Postoperative view. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view); (C) periapical view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f8.tif
Figure 8.
At a 10-month recall check. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view); (C) periapical view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f9.tif
Figure 9.
Preoperative view. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view); (C) periapical view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f10.tif
Figure 10.
#31 Coronal fragment as a natural tooth pontic. (A) Extracted coronal fragment; (B) polished coronal fragment (labial view); (C) polished coronal fragment (lingual view).
undefined
rde-45-e8f11.tif
Figure 11.
Lingual view after the abutment preparation was done.
undefined
rde-45-e8f12.tif
Figure 12.
Postoperative view. (A) Intraoral photograph (labial view); (B) intraoral photograph (lingual view); (C) periapical view.
undefined
rde-45-e8f13.tif
Figure 13.
At an 8-month recall check.
undefined
TOOLS
Similar articles