OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a stable treatment concept for the oral rehabilitation of children with severe oligodontia. The treatment is intended to solve a specific problem caused by limited skeletal growth, multiple congenital missing teeth, underdeveloped bone volume and young age. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A surgical/prosthodontic approach was chosen for six patients with subtotal edentulism despite their young age. To support removable dentures the maxilla was treated with onplants (OnPlant), whereas dental rootform implants (NobelReplace, Nobel Biocare) were placed in the mandible. RESULTS: Eight onplants were placed in the hard palate of four patients for rehabilitating the maxilla and eight dental rootform implants were placed interforaminally in three patients to rehabilitate the mandible. While none of the rootform implants was lost, one onplant was lost and replaced with a stable outcome. The mean follow-up time of the onplants was 5 (±1) years vs. 3 (±2) years for the rootform implants. CONCLUSION: The evaluation showed the treatment concept described to ensure stable oral rehabilitation and recovery of the stomatognathic system even during the juvenile growth period.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a stable treatment concept for the oral rehabilitation of children with severe oligodontia. The treatment is intended to solve a specific problem caused by limited skeletal growth, multiple congenital missing teeth, underdeveloped bone volume and young age. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A surgical/prosthodontic approach was chosen for six patients with subtotal edentulism despite their young age. To support removable dentures the maxilla was treated with onplants (OnPlant), whereas dental rootform implants (NobelReplace, Nobel Biocare) were placed in the mandible. RESULTS: Eight onplants were placed in the hard palate of four patients for rehabilitating the maxilla and eight dental rootform implants were placed interforaminally in three patients to rehabilitate the mandible. While none of the rootform implants was lost, one onplant was lost and replaced with a stable outcome. The mean follow-up time of the onplants was 5 (±1) years vs. 3 (±2) years for the rootform implants. CONCLUSION: The evaluation showed the treatment concept described to ensure stable oral rehabilitation and recovery of the stomatognathic system even during the juvenile growth period.