Partner Magazine logo 10

14 CASE STUDY conclusion that no essential differences were identifiable with either form of restoration. In this particular case, the decision in favor of maximum long-term stability was made for the insertion of two implants. Besides sufficient hard and soft tissue augmentation, the selection of a suitable implant diameter is crucial, because, according to the Tarnow rules, the separation between neighboring teeth and implants must be at least 1.5 millimeters and at least a 3.9 millimeter between implants [16]. The papilla between 21 and 22 is also flatter in the case presented than with natural teeth due to the effects described. This effect is accentuated by the triangular basic shape of the natural teeth. As the teeth partly display extended vestibular composite restorations, it would be worth considering the fabrication of a dual veneer, which, through slight change in the tooth shapes, would serve to enhance the overall esthetics. The patient rejected this, however, as she is very satisfied with the esthetics achieved. This is in line with the results of the study group headed by Tymstra [17], whereby both forms of restoration can lead to a high level of patient satisfaction, assuming correct surgical and prosthetic management. Fig. 34: The X-ray shows the ossified bone structure and the implants inserted according to the Tarnow rules. Fig. 32: The anatomical crown contour, the ceramic layering, the surface texture underline the esthetic outcome. Fig. 33: The shaped emergence profiles support the harmonious line of soft tissue and a stable gingival cuff.