Differences in Masticatory Function in Patients with Endodontically Treated Teeth and Single-implant-supported Prostheses: A Pilot Study

被引:24
作者
Woodmansey, Karl F. [1 ]
Ayik, Murat [1 ]
Buschang, Peter H. [2 ]
White, Cathy A. [1 ]
He, Jianing [1 ]
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ Syst, Baylor Coll Dent, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Endodont, Dallas, TX 75246 USA
[2] Texas A&M Univ Syst, Baylor Coll Dent, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Orthodont, Dallas, TX 75246 USA
关键词
Bite force; endodontic treatment; implant; masticatory function; occlusal contact; PERFORMANCE; EFFICIENCY; FOOD; COMMINUTION; EXTRACTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.joen.2008.10.016
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Endodontic treatment and dental implants are both viable treatment options to restore a compromised dentition. How these treatments impact patients' ability to chew has not been studied. The purpose of this study was to compare various parameters of masticatory function in patients with endodontically treated teeth and single-implant supported prostheses. Fifty patients were included in this study. Twenty-five patients had mandibular molar root canals, and 25 had single implant-supported prostheses in the mandibular molar region. The natural tooth contralateral to the treated side served as the internal control. Maximum bite force, chewing efficiency, and areas of occlusal contact and near contact (ACNC) were recorded for each subject, along with a questionnaire to evaluate subjective chewing ability. When compared with contralateral controls, dental implants were found to have significantly lower maximum bite forces, reduced chewing efficiency, and smaller ACNC. Endodontically treated teeth were not statistically different than their contralateral controls. These results indicate that endodontically treated natural teeth may provide more effective occlusal contact during masticatory function compared with implant-supported restorations, leading to more efficient mastication. (J Endod 2009;35:10-14)
引用
收藏
页码:10 / 14
页数:5
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] AKEEL R, 1992, SWED DENT J, V16, P191
  • [2] Masticatory performance: a protocol for standardized production of an artificial test food
    Albert, TE
    Buschang, PH
    Throckmorton, GS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION, 2003, 30 (07) : 720 - 722
  • [3] BAKKE M, 1993, SCAND J DENT RES, V101, P314
  • [4] Bates J F, 1976, J Oral Rehabil, V3, P57, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1976.tb00929.x
  • [5] The effects of bolus size and chewing rate on masticatory performance with artificial test foods
    Buschang, PH
    Throckmorton, GS
    Travers, KH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION, 1997, 24 (07) : 522 - 526
  • [6] Two-year incidence of oral disadvantage, a measure of oral health-related quality of life
    Chavers, LS
    Gilbert, GH
    Shelton, BJ
    [J]. COMMUNITY DENTISTRY AND ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 31 (01) : 21 - 29
  • [7] Retrospective cross sectional comparison of initial nonsurgical endodontic treatment and single-tooth implants
    Doyle, Scott L.
    Hodges, James S.
    Pesun, Igor J.
    Law, Alan S.
    Bowles, Walter R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2006, 32 (09) : 822 - 827
  • [8] MASTICATORY EFFICIENCY
    EDLUND, J
    LAMM, CJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION, 1980, 7 (02) : 123 - 130
  • [9] English JD, 2002, ANGLE ORTHOD, V72, P21
  • [10] Glickman GN, 2003, QUINTESSENCE INT, V34, P560