Management of Limited Interocclusal Space Using Castableabutment - A Clinical Case

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: May 29, 2023
Keywords:
UCLA Screw Retained Cement Retained Aesthetics Retrievability Inadequate Interocclusal Space

Main Article Content

Pardeep Bansal
Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
Preetika Bansal
Professor, Department of Periodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
Kannupriya Aggarwal
Post-Graduate, Department of Prosthodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
Rithika Elsa George
Post-Graduate, Department of Prosthodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
Prabjeet Kaur
Post-Graduate, Department of Prosthodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India

Abstract

The choice of either cement or screw to retain the prosthesis depends on the clinician’s preference. Both treatment modalities have their advantages and disadvantages. Cement retained has better aesthetics and low cost however screw-retained prosthesis preserves gingival health and is retrievable that is achieved without damaging the restoration or any implant component. This case report presents a case with the replacement of a mandibular molar due to inadequate interocclusal distance for cement-retained prosthesis and the situation was managed with screw-retained UCLA abutment.

Article Details

How to Cite
Pardeep Bansal, Preetika Bansal, Kannupriya Aggarwal, Rithika Elsa George, & Prabjeet Kaur. (2023). Management of Limited Interocclusal Space Using Castableabutment - A Clinical Case. Journal of Coastal Life Medicine, 11(2), 739–744. Retrieved from https://www.jclmm.com/index.php/journal/article/view/1083
Issue
Vol. 11: Number 2, 2023
Section
Articles

References

Misch CE. “The importance of dental implants”. General Dentistry 49 (2001): 38-45.

Assaf, M. and Alaa'Z, A.G., 2014. Screw-retained crown restorations of single implants: A step-by-step clinical guide. European journal of dentistry, 8(04), pp.563-570.

Chopra, S., Bansal, P. and Bansal, P., 2020. Essix Appliance: An Innovation Modification for use as Temporary Bridge-A Case Report. Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research, 8(1), p.184.

Van Staden, R.C., Guan, H., Loo, Y.C. and Johnson, N.W., 2008. Comparative analysis of internal and external-hex crown connection systems-a finite element study. Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering, 1(01), p.10.

Goiato, M.C., Sônego, M.V., da Silva, E.V.F., de CarvalhoDekon, S.F., de Medeiros, R.A., de Carvalho, K.H.T. and Dos Santos, D.M., 2015. Dynamic UCLA for single tilted implant in an aesthetic region. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports, 7, pp.149-153.

Kalpana, D., Rao, S.J., Pathi, V., Joseph, J.K. and Parween, N., 2018. Management of insufficient crown height space with UCLA abutments.

Krishnan, V., Tony Thomas, C. and Sabu, I., 2014. Management of abutment screw loosening: Review of literature and report of a case. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 14(3), pp.208-214.

Hickey, J.C., 1968. Glossary of prosthodontic terms. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 20(5), pp.443-480.

Hebel, K.S. and Gajjar, R.C., 1997. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 77(1), pp.28-35.