CASE STUDY – 7 CARMEN

Dental facelift: Case Study

Failed aesthetics: failing crowns and bridgework affecting patients comfort, function and aesthetics. This is further compounded by the presence of high smile line.

Treatment: reconstruction of maxilla (upper arch)and mandible (lower arch) using tooth supported and implant supported crowns and site augmentation (soft and hard tissue grafting) where teeth have failed that require removal.

This study will show

Complexity of treatment
Treatment outcome
Patient’s assessment
Please refer to the video provided

Chief concerns: improving the aesthetic apperance of her smile. The concern is to improve the upper arch shape and smile line as well as tooth colour. This lovely patient wants to smile and chew her food confidently. Patient was specifically concerned about recent dental work by another dentist causing protrusion and canting of upper central incisors creating an aesthetic disturbance

Initial Presentation

Patient was referred by her dentist, seeking specialist’s opinion and treatment in relation to fixed option of restoring missing teeth and failing dentition as well as tooth supported crowns. The loss of teeth from failing bridgework has left considerable soft and hard tissue defect that required augmentation to create base for tooth replacement.

We have unacceptable aesthetics and function. Its surprising to see how much patients can tolerate with broken down dentition. I guess we all are busy in our lives, looking after the family and finally when everyone is ok, it time for us.

In general, whenever possible we would like to replace, or at least get close to the foundation bone and gum tissues to allow optimal tooth position in the arch that creates natural aesthetics.

Note Upper arch: broken-down dentition, discoloured crown margins, unnatural teeth: colour, form, progression & gum line

Lower arch: Missing molars and premolars on LRS

Diagnosis: Unacceptable dental aesthetics & fucntion due dissatisfaction with failing fixed restorations and general tooth discolouration

Our Aim: to improve the aesthetics of upper arch: Tooth shape, display, tooth colour, length, symmetry and smile line in general, as well replacing missing teeth:23,24,14,16 using implant supported crowns and replacing existing faulty crowns with new ceramic crowns.

This was accomplished with minimal discomfort to the patient and Mrs. T. Never left the practice without missing teeth. The provisional bridgework as both aesthetic and function (please Videos provided).

Treatment

Following with discussion of all risks and treatment modalities with our patient that included

No treatment: this is not an option as the restorations are failing and affecting longevity of supporting teeth
Repair existing restorations and make removable partial denture: this is a temporary measure and not accepted by the patient
Fixed option: implant & tooth supported crowns and bridgework, described below

Removal of failing bridgeworks

Placement of provisional crowns and bridgework

Placement if implants: lower arch ( at sites: 36,44,45&46) and upper arch (14,16,24,25 & 27)
Finalize the treatment with implant and tooth supported crowns and bridgework in the upper arch.The Provisional restorations for that important confidence for normative function comfort & aesthetics.

Laboratory: Reconstruction of upper arch: implant supported bridgework and tooth supported crowns

Clinical: Reconstruction of upper arch: implant supported bridgework and tooth supported crowns

Procedure &Results

The work was completed in six months and implants to integrate with bone. Is best not to rush biology and allow optimal healing.

Final treatment outcome: we have restored esthetics comfort & function and we have a happy patient

Unfortunately, this work was initially completed by a dentist with minimal qualifications and experience. Hence the reason for patient seeking specialist prosthodontist for correct diagnosis and treatment planning; providing an optimal outcome for this lovely patient.