Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Do posterior teeth supra-erupt when opposite resected segments have
not been prosthetically restored?
Arieh Shifman 1a , Shlomo Calderon 2b*
¹Department of Oral Rehabilitation, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
²Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva, Israel
DMD, Senior Clinical Lecturer
DMD, Professor
a
b
Presented by Prof. Shlomo Calderon before the International College of Prosthodontists, Biennial Congress Torino, Italy, September 2013
Received: April 04, 2016
Revised: May 04, 2016
Accepted: May 20, 2016
Published: May 23, 2016
Academic Editor: Heinz Kniha, DDS, MD, PhD, Associate Professor, Ludwig-Maximilians- München University, München, Germany
Cite this article:
Shifman A, Calderon S. Do posterior teeth supra-erupt when opposite resected segments have not been prosthetically restored? Stoma Edu J.
2014;4(1):62-67.
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess the rate and timing of possible supra-eruption of
posterior teeth opposing resected segments in a select maxillofacial group of postsurgical patients.
Methodology: Twenty patients were included. 16 underwent simultaneous segmental mandibular
resections and iliac bone graft reconstructions. The remaining 4 had partial maxillary resections with
primary closure of the defect. No patient received any prosthetic restoration. Clinical photographs
and radiographs at the last follow-up examinations were compared by superimposition to those
obtained initially (mean 6.9 years).
Results: The results of this longitudinal retrospective study showed that not even slight supra-
eruption had occurred in any of the 16 patients.
Conclusion: These findings are discussed with regard to their possible cause and prosthodontic
implications.
Keywords: super-eruption, supra-eruption, occlusion, unopposed molars, resected segments.
1. Introduction
Postsurgical maxillofacial patients occasionally
remain without further prosthetic treatment.
Patients may prefer not to undergo restorative
treatment for a variety of reasons, including
lack of perceived esthetic impairment where
only posterior segments are involved, limited
functional impairment, reluctance to undergo
additional surgery and also for reasons of financial
constraints.
In a study reporting on a group of 28 patients who
underwent ablative tumor surgery and mandibular
reconstructions with osseocutaneous fibula free
flap 13 patients were postoperatively rehabilitated
with implant-supported prostheses, whereas 18
patients had no dental prosthetic rehabilitation. 1
These authors conclude that oral functions such
as speech, diet tolerance and oral competence
were not directly affected by the presence of
prosthetic restorations. A decisive factor affecting
oral function in these patients was the extent of
soft-tissue loss.
In lieu of the accepted notion that the presence
of molar teeth is essential for proper masticatory
function and occlusal stability, 2-4 the shortened
dental arch (SDA) concept emerged as paradigm
shift, namely that two bilateral pairs of occlusal
contacts (premolar occlusion) are sufficient for
these functions. 5-7 Studies have shown that no
marked adverse outcome has been displayed
in SDA cases, such as temporomandibular (TM)
overloading and TM disorders or parameters
related to occlusal stability in the SDA arch
(interdental spacing in the premolar area, overbite,
increased wear of the remaining anterior teeth, or
loss of alveolar bone supporting these teeth. 5-7
Nonetheless, little attention has been given in the
literature to possible supra-eruption (SE) of molar
teeth in the opposing dental arch. Kiliaridis et al. 8
examined 84 unopposed molars in 53 patients
*Corresponding author:
Professor Shlomo Calderon, DMD, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center IL-49100 Petah Tikva, Israel
Tel/Fax: +972-3-937-7207 / +972-3-937-7204, e-mail: [email protected]
62
Stoma Edu J. 2017;4(1): 62-67. http://www.stomaeduj.com