Dental implants and dental implant/prosthetic tooth systems

Abstract

A one-piece dental implant having a longitudinal axis comprises a head portion at a first end of the implant, a tip portion at a second end of the implant and a body portion between the head portion and the tip portion. The body portion has a first portion proximate the head portion with a plurality of longitudinal grooves substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis and a second portion proximate the tip portion having a substantially circumferential groove, wherein the outer diameter of the first portion is greater than the outer diameter of the second portion. The first and second portions are for being embedded in the jaw bone. The dental implant is preferably dimensioned to conform to the natural shape of the cervical ⅓ of the root of the tooth being replaced, and to the natural relationship between the cemento-enamel junction of the tooth being replaced and to minimize adverse immunological responses by the jaw bone during healing, thereby improving the aesthetic appearance of the implant and prosthetic tooth attached thereto. A dental implant and prosthetic tooth system is also disclosed, wherein the prosthetic tooth conforms to the shape of the cervical ⅓ of the crown of the tooth being replaced. A method for implanting a dental implant through use of a reference, is also disclosed.

Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION [0001] Dental implants are inserted into the base of the jaw and have a portion protruding through the mucous gum tissue for providing attachment anchorage for artificial teeth. An artificial tooth may be attached directly to the implant, or to an abutment connected to the implant. Dental implants are becoming increasingly popular alternatives to dentures. [0002] Dental implants have been used in the hard bone of the lower jaw with great success. The upper jaw bone, however, is very soft and it is common for dental implants in the upper jaw to lack primary stability. [0003] There are three major types of dental implants: 1) press-fit; 2) self-tapping; and 3) pre-tapping. The press-fit type implants are inserted into holes drilled into the bone without rotation. Press-fit implants do not couple tightly to the soft bone of the upper jaw. [0004] Self-tapping and pre-tapping type implants have horizontal threads for being screwed into holes drilled into the j...

AI Technical Summary

Benefits of technology

[0012] In one aspect of the invention, a dental implant has both longitudinal and vertical grooves for improved primary stability and osteointegration. In other aspects of the invention, a dental implant and a dental implant / prosthetic tooth system substantially conforms to the natural relationships and shapes of the tooth being replaced. In particular, a dental implant is shaped and dimensioned to substantially conform to the natural biological relationship between the bone crest and the cemento-enamel junction. The gingival margin is therefore maintained. The preferred dental implant combines these aspects of the invention.

[0015] In another embodiment of the embodiment of the invention, a dental implant is provided having a buccal side for being aligned with the buccal side of the jaw bone, a lingual side for being aligned with a lingual side of the jaw bone and interproximal sides between the buccal and lingual sides. The height of the top portion of the dental implant is less on the buccal side of the implant and rises toward the interproximal sides of the implant, as does the cemento-enamel junction. The height of the top portion may decrease from the interproximal sides of the implant to the lingual side, as well.

Problems solved by technology

The upper jaw bone, however, is very soft and it is common for dental implants in the upper jaw to lack primary stability.

While screwing self-tapping and pretapping implants into the bone generally improves the mechanical coupling between the implant and bone, it has been found that in the soft bone of the upper jaw, the rotation of both the self-tapping and pre-tapping implants may destroy the grooves, preventing tight coupling between the implant and the bone.

Mechanical solutions to achieving primary stability and osteointegration have generally ignored the natural shapes of the root and crown of the natural tooth being replaced and have not conformed to the natural relationship between the tooth and the jaw bone, resulting in adverse immunological responses by the jaw bone which both weakens primary stability and osteointegration, and sacrifices aesthetics.

For example, it has been found that the failure of interface between the dental implant and the prosthetic tooth to conform to the shape and location of the cemento-enamel junction between the crown and root of the tooth being replaced causes an adverse immunological response by the bone to the dental implant, resulting in bone resorbtion.

This can weaken the bond between the implant and the bone and leave pockets which can collect plaque.

In addition, since a constant distance is naturally maintained between the bone crest and the gingival margin, as the bone resorbs, the gingival margin recesses, presenting an unpleasant aesthetic appearance.

Another cause of adverse immunological responses in the jawbone are microgaps between the dental implant, whose top surface is typically positioned at or below the bone crest, and the abutment attached to the implant.

Once again, bone resorbtion and gingival margin recession may result.

However, the flat tops of these implants do not match the shape of the cemento-enamel junction of the natural tooth being replaced.

While attempts have been made to conform the abutment and the prosthetic tooth to the natural shape of the cervical {fraction (1 / 3)} of the root and the cervical {fraction (1 / 3)} of the crown of the tooth being replaced, the unnatural shape of the dental implant limits how closely the natural shape of the root and crown can be recreated.

Such soft tissue may interfere with the osteointegration of the implant, resulting in implant failure.

Such designs have an increased risk of infection and lack osteointegration.

Rotation of the implant, either during rotation of the implant to insert the implant into the jaw bone or after final positioning of the implant, also interferes with attempts to close such gaps.

Images