Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy
Identifieur interne : 001468 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001467; suivant : 001469Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy
Auteurs : George PriestSource :
- Journal of Prosthodontics [ 1059-941X ] ; 2011-02.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abutment, Abutment teeth, Adjacent teeth, American college, Anterior teeth, Clin, Compend contin educ dent, Complete edentulism, Dent, Dent assoc, Dental implants, Dental prostheses, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous criteria, Edentulous patients, Endodontic, Endodontic treatment, Endodontically, Female patient, Fpd, Healthy teeth, Implant, Implant placement, Implant prosthesis, Incisor, Maxillary, Maxillary teeth, Oral maxillofac implants, Overall prognosis, Partial dentures, Periodontal, Periodontal prognosis, Periodontally, Periodontol, Prognosis, Prosthesis, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic treatment, Prosthodont, Prosthodontic, Prosthodontics, Prosthodontist, Prosthodontists revisiting tooth preservation priest, Radiograph, Removable, Removable prostheses, Revisiting, Revisiting tooth preservation priest figure, Rpds, Survival rates, Systematic review, Tooth loss, Tooth preparation, Tooth preservation, Tooth replacement, Tooth structure, Treatment plan, Treatment plans.
- Teeft :
- Abutment, Abutment teeth, Adjacent teeth, American college, Anterior teeth, Clin, Compend contin educ dent, Complete edentulism, Dent, Dent assoc, Dental implants, Dental prostheses, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous criteria, Edentulous patients, Endodontic, Endodontic treatment, Endodontically, Female patient, Fpd, Healthy teeth, Implant, Implant placement, Implant prosthesis, Incisor, Maxillary, Maxillary teeth, Oral maxillofac implants, Overall prognosis, Partial dentures, Periodontal, Periodontal prognosis, Periodontally, Periodontol, Prognosis, Prosthesis, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic treatment, Prosthodont, Prosthodontic, Prosthodontics, Prosthodontist, Prosthodontists revisiting tooth preservation priest, Radiograph, Removable, Removable prostheses, Revisiting, Revisiting tooth preservation priest figure, Rpds, Survival rates, Systematic review, Tooth loss, Tooth preparation, Tooth preservation, Tooth replacement, Tooth structure, Treatment plan, Treatment plans.
Abstract
Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title><author><name sortKey="Priest, George" sort="Priest, George" uniqKey="Priest G" first="George" last="Priest">George Priest</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5</idno><date when="2011" year="2011">2011</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001468</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001468</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title><author><name sortKey="Priest, George" sort="Priest, George" uniqKey="Priest G" first="George" last="Priest">George Priest</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Prosthodontics</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS</title><idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno><idno type="eISSN">1532-849X</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">20</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="144">144</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="152">152</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2011-02">2011-02</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment teeth</term><term>Adjacent teeth</term><term>American college</term><term>Anterior teeth</term><term>Clin</term><term>Compend contin educ dent</term><term>Complete edentulism</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dent assoc</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental prostheses</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous criteria</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Endodontic</term><term>Endodontic treatment</term><term>Endodontically</term><term>Female patient</term><term>Fpd</term><term>Healthy teeth</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant placement</term><term>Implant prosthesis</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Maxillary</term><term>Maxillary teeth</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Overall prognosis</term><term>Partial dentures</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal prognosis</term><term>Periodontally</term><term>Periodontol</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic treatment</term><term>Prosthodont</term><term>Prosthodontic</term><term>Prosthodontics</term><term>Prosthodontist</term><term>Prosthodontists revisiting tooth preservation priest</term><term>Radiograph</term><term>Removable</term><term>Removable prostheses</term><term>Revisiting</term><term>Revisiting tooth preservation priest figure</term><term>Rpds</term><term>Survival rates</term><term>Systematic review</term><term>Tooth loss</term><term>Tooth preparation</term><term>Tooth preservation</term><term>Tooth replacement</term><term>Tooth structure</term><term>Treatment plan</term><term>Treatment plans</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment teeth</term><term>Adjacent teeth</term><term>American college</term><term>Anterior teeth</term><term>Clin</term><term>Compend contin educ dent</term><term>Complete edentulism</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dent assoc</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental prostheses</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous criteria</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Endodontic</term><term>Endodontic treatment</term><term>Endodontically</term><term>Female patient</term><term>Fpd</term><term>Healthy teeth</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant placement</term><term>Implant prosthesis</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Maxillary</term><term>Maxillary teeth</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Overall prognosis</term><term>Partial dentures</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal prognosis</term><term>Periodontally</term><term>Periodontol</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic treatment</term><term>Prosthodont</term><term>Prosthodontic</term><term>Prosthodontics</term><term>Prosthodontist</term><term>Prosthodontists revisiting tooth preservation priest</term><term>Radiograph</term><term>Removable</term><term>Removable prostheses</term><term>Revisiting</term><term>Revisiting tooth preservation priest figure</term><term>Rpds</term><term>Survival rates</term><term>Systematic review</term><term>Tooth loss</term><term>Tooth preparation</term><term>Tooth preservation</term><term>Tooth replacement</term><term>Tooth structure</term><term>Treatment plan</term><term>Treatment plans</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>prosthesis</json:string><json:string>abutment</json:string><json:string>endodontically</json:string><json:string>fpd</json:string><json:string>endodontic</json:string><json:string>maxillary</json:string><json:string>prosthetic</json:string><json:string>periodontal</json:string><json:string>prosthodontic</json:string><json:string>prosthodontics</json:string><json:string>periodontally</json:string><json:string>american college</json:string><json:string>radiograph</json:string><json:string>prosthodontist</json:string><json:string>incisor</json:string><json:string>tooth preservation</json:string><json:string>prosthodont</json:string><json:string>revisiting</json:string><json:string>prognosis</json:string><json:string>prosthet</json:string><json:string>prosthet dent</json:string><json:string>denture</json:string><json:string>clin</json:string><json:string>endodontic treatment</json:string><json:string>periodontol</json:string><json:string>rpds</json:string><json:string>edentulous</json:string><json:string>systematic review</json:string><json:string>maxillary teeth</json:string><json:string>dental implants</json:string><json:string>implant placement</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>dent assoc</json:string><json:string>treatment plan</json:string><json:string>overall prognosis</json:string><json:string>anterior teeth</json:string><json:string>tooth preparation</json:string><json:string>adjacent teeth</json:string><json:string>tooth loss</json:string><json:string>implant prosthesis</json:string><json:string>healthy teeth</json:string><json:string>removable</json:string><json:string>removable prostheses</json:string><json:string>oral maxillofac implants</json:string><json:string>dental prostheses</json:string><json:string>treatment plans</json:string><json:string>prosthetic treatment</json:string><json:string>tooth replacement</json:string><json:string>abutment teeth</json:string><json:string>periodontal prognosis</json:string><json:string>edentulous criteria</json:string><json:string>edentulous patients</json:string><json:string>prosthodontists revisiting tooth preservation priest</json:string><json:string>female patient</json:string><json:string>complete edentulism</json:string><json:string>tooth structure</json:string><json:string>compend contin educ dent</json:string><json:string>revisiting tooth preservation priest figure</json:string><json:string>survival rates</json:string><json:string>partial dentures</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>George Priest DMD</name><affiliations><json:string>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Tooth preservation</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>extraction</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>implant</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>prognosis</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>treatment plan</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>endodontics</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>periodontics</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>abutment</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>PDI</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>JOPR672</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-MNSSGVP7-Q</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>9.316</score><pdfWordCount>5334</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>34482</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>9</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>595.274 x 782.286 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>193</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1388</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>9</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title><pmid><json:string>21284759</json:string></pmid><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Journal of Prosthodontics</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1532-849X</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>1059-941X</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1532-849X</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>JOPR</json:string></publisherId><volume>20</volume><issue>2</issue><pages><first>144</first><last>152</last><total>9</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2011</json:string><json:string>1952</json:string><json:string>from 1966 through 2004</json:string></date><geogName><json:string>Hilton Head Island</json:string></geogName><orgName><json:string>American College of Prosthodontists Revisiting Tooth Preservation Priest Several</json:string><json:string>American College of Prosthodontists Revisiting Tooth Preservation Priest</json:string><json:string>American College of Prosthodontists Revisiting Tooth Preservation Priest These</json:string><json:string>American College of Prosthodontists Revisiting Tooth Preservation Priest Figure</json:string><json:string>American College of Prosthodontists</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Kennedy Class</json:string><json:string>George Priest</json:string><json:string>In</json:string><json:string>Evidence</json:string><json:string>I. Figure</json:string><json:string>Data</json:string><json:string>Milton DeVan</json:string><json:string>Longitudinal</json:string><json:string>Recent</json:string></persName><placeName></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Miyamoto et al</json:string><json:string>Pretzl et al</json:string><json:string>De Backer et al</json:string><json:string>Scurria et al</json:string><json:string>Krennmair et al</json:string><json:string>Misch et al</json:string><json:string>Greenstein et al</json:string><json:string>Lekholm et al</json:string><json:string>Torabinejad et al</json:string><json:string>Carnevale et al</json:string><json:string>Ziataric et al</json:string><json:string>Guckes et al</json:string><json:string>Tan et al</json:string><json:string>Cabanilla et al</json:string><json:string>Heffernan et al</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-MNSSGVP7-Q</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - General Dentistry</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>2011</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2011</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x</json:string></doi><id>2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><availability><licence>© 2011 by The American College of Prosthodontists</licence></availability><date type="published" when="2011-02"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title><title level="a" type="short">Revisiting Tooth Preservation</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">George</forename><surname>Priest</surname><roleName type="degree">DMD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-MNSSGVP7-Q</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x</idno><idno type="unit">JOPR672</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:JOPR.JOPR672.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Prosthodontics</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS</title><idno type="pISSN">1059-941X</idno><idno type="eISSN">1532-849X</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1532-849X</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/jopr.2011.20.issue-2</idno><idno type="product">JOPR</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">20</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="144">144</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="152">152</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2011-02"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><head>Abstract</head><p>Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">Tooth preservation</term><term xml:id="k2">extraction</term><term xml:id="k3">implant</term><term xml:id="k4">prognosis</term><term xml:id="k5">treatment plan</term><term xml:id="k6">endodontics</term><term xml:id="k7">periodontics</term><term xml:id="k8">abutment</term><term xml:id="k9">PDI</term></keywords><keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Articles</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisherName><publisherLoc>Malden, USA</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1532-849X</doi><issn type="print">1059-941X</issn><issn type="electronic">1532-849X</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="JOPR"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS">Journal of Prosthodontics</title><title type="subtitle">Implant, Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="02102"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/jopr.2011.20.issue-2</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="20">20</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="2">2</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2011-02">February 2011</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="13" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="JOPR672"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="9"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Articles</title></titleGroup><copyright>© 2011 by The American College of Prosthodontists</copyright><eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.4.6 mode:FullText" date="2011-02-15"></event><event type="publishedOnlineEarlyUnpaginated" date="2011-02-01"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2011-02-01"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2011-02-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-31"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-30"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="144">144</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="152">152</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo><b>Correspondence</b>
George Priest, 23 Main St., Ste 303, Hilton Head Island, SC 29926. E‐mail: <email>drgeorge@priestpros.com</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:JOPR.JOPR672.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Accepted March 17, 2010</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="20"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="51"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="63"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title><title type="shortAuthors">Priest</title><title type="short">Revisiting Tooth Preservation</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>George</givenNames><familyName>Priest</familyName><degrees>DMD</degrees></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">Tooth preservation</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">extraction</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">implant</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">prognosis</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">treatment plan</keyword><keyword xml:id="k6">endodontics</keyword><keyword xml:id="k7">periodontics</keyword><keyword xml:id="k8">abutment</keyword><keyword xml:id="k9">PDI</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Revisiting Tooth Preservation</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">George</namePart><namePart type="family">Priest</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DMD</namePart><affiliation>Private Practice, Hilton Head Island, SC</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Malden, USA</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2011-02</dateIssued><edition>Accepted March 17, 2010</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="figures">20</extent><extent unit="tables">0</extent><extent unit="formulas">0</extent><extent unit="references">51</extent><extent unit="linksCrossRef">63</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Dental implants have been established as long‐term supports for tooth replacements, and they have profoundly altered treatment concepts of traditional prosthodontics. The use of teeth as prosthetic abutments is revisited relative to implants as predictable support mechanisms for fixed and removable prostheses. The purpose of this review is to appraise tooth preservation in a different manner while considering implants as additional and even preferred support mechanisms for dental prostheses. Data reviewed in this article include a comparison of implants and traditional prostheses and their effects on abutment teeth, the use of periodontally and endodontically compromised teeth as abutments, and prosthetic complications potentially created by healthy remaining teeth. The evidence presented suggests that the longstanding objective of tooth preservation during prosthetic treatment be appended to include the use of dental implants for fixed/removable prostheses, and to avoid or remove teeth presenting as liabilities that diminish the overall prognosis. Patients are not well served if they are faced with biologic, economic, and psychological burdens associated with ongoing revisions of dental rehabilitations using natural teeth. Dentists must use all means available to carefully evaluate remaining teeth to determine if they benefit or impair proposed prosthetic outcomes.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>Tooth preservation</topic><topic>extraction</topic><topic>implant</topic><topic>prognosis</topic><topic>treatment plan</topic><topic>endodontics</topic><topic>periodontics</topic><topic>abutment</topic><topic>PDI</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Prosthodontics</title><subTitle>Implant, Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry</subTitle></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">1059-941X</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1532-849X</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1532-849X</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">JOPR</identifier><part><date>2011</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>20</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>144</start><end>152</end><total>9</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-MNSSGVP7-Q</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00672.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">JOPR672</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2011 by The American College of Prosthodontists</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Inc</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001468 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001468 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:2AA051B00362DCE139F06ABB44B93C636CE488D5
|texte= Revisiting Tooth Preservation in Prosthodontic Therapy
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |