What prosthodontic therapy should we select for periodontally compromised patients? Part 2: Review of the literature focusing on conventional prosthodontic therapy for periodontally compromised patients and clinical implication (RPD vs FPD vs implant)

Taro Kanno, Keisuke Nakamura, Eisei Hayashi, Kohei Kimura, Hideaki Hirooka, Kohei Kimura

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review the clinical literature on fixed partial denture (FPD) and removable partial denture (RPD)treatment for periodontally compromised patients with partial dentate. In addition, prosthodontic management in periodontitis-susceptible subjects was evaluated from the results of Part 1 and Part 2. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical studies that documented survival rates of FPD in periodontally compromised patients were selected and reviewed. RESULTS: There was no RPD study that fulfilled the criteria of this review paper. On the other hand, 8 reports that were reviewed in this study showed good survival rate of FPD in long-term clinical results. CONCLUSION: Since the number of reports on RPD is very few, it was difficult to evaluate the RPD treatment for periodontally compromised patients. From the results of some long-term follow-up retrospective studies, however, it was suggested that FPD of high-risk design showed excellent results. Regarding management in periodontits- susceptible subjects, it should be discussed whether positive prosthodontic treatment is necessary. Strict plaque control by both doctors and patients before/after treatment is indispensable for prosthodontic management in periodontally compromised patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)143-149
Number of pages7
JournalNihon Hotetsu Shika Gakkai zasshi
Volume52
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008 Apr

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'What prosthodontic therapy should we select for periodontally compromised patients? Part 2: Review of the literature focusing on conventional prosthodontic therapy for periodontally compromised patients and clinical implication (RPD vs FPD vs implant)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this