furcation involvement

96,348 views 49 slides Apr 27, 2016
Slide 1
Slide 1 of 49
Slide 1
1
Slide 2
2
Slide 3
3
Slide 4
4
Slide 5
5
Slide 6
6
Slide 7
7
Slide 8
8
Slide 9
9
Slide 10
10
Slide 11
11
Slide 12
12
Slide 13
13
Slide 14
14
Slide 15
15
Slide 16
16
Slide 17
17
Slide 18
18
Slide 19
19
Slide 20
20
Slide 21
21
Slide 22
22
Slide 23
23
Slide 24
24
Slide 25
25
Slide 26
26
Slide 27
27
Slide 28
28
Slide 29
29
Slide 30
30
Slide 31
31
Slide 32
32
Slide 33
33
Slide 34
34
Slide 35
35
Slide 36
36
Slide 37
37
Slide 38
38
Slide 39
39
Slide 40
40
Slide 41
41
Slide 42
42
Slide 43
43
Slide 44
44
Slide 45
45
Slide 46
46
Slide 47
47
Slide 48
48
Slide 49
49

About This Presentation

Molar furcation, furcation, treatment of furcation


Slide Content

Furcation Its Involvement and R x Dr Jignesh

Why Furcation is an area of complex anatomic morphology ? Difficult for routine periodontal instrumentation Difficult to maintain by routine home care clinical finding of furcation indicates advanced periodontitis and less favourable prognosis Introduction Dr Jignesh

BASIC TERMINOLOGIES Dr Jignesh

Maxillary Molars & Premolars Brief about normal anatomy mesial distal Dr Jignesh

Complexity in Anatomy Dr Jignesh

Mandibular Molars and other teeth Dr Jignesh

Complexity in Anatomy Dr Jignesh

Based on horizontal attachment loss Glickman’s classification (1953) Hamp’s classification (1975) 2. Based on Horizontal and vertical componenets Tarnow and Fletcher’s classification (1984) 3. Based on Combination of these findings and morphology of bone deformity Easley and Drennan’s classification (1969) Classifications of Furcation Involvement (FI) Dr Jignesh

Four grades Glickman’s classification (1953) Dr Jignesh

GR-III GR-IV Dr Jignesh

Hamp’s Classification (1975) Horizontal loss ≤ 3 mm. Horizontal loss of support > 3mm Horizontal through and through destruction Class I Class II Class III Dr Jignesh

Tarnow and Fletcher (1984) Based on vertical component 3 subgroups: Subgroup A: 1-3mm Subgroup B: 4-6mm Subgroup C: >7mm Dr Jignesh

Clinical Probing Diagnosis Naber’s Probe No. 23 Explorer Each furcation entrance is classified. Dr Jignesh

Identification of Local anatomic factors: Root trunk length Root length Interradicular dimension Anatomy of furcation Cervical Enamel Projections Dr Jignesh

Radiographically Dr Jignesh

Different angulation Dr Jignesh

Endodontic involvement Differential Diagnosis Dr Jignesh

TFO Dr Jignesh

Main objectives are: Elimination of the microbial plaque from root complex Establishment of an anatomy to facilitates proper self‐performed plaque control Prevent further attachment loss Treatment Aspect Dr Jignesh

Treatment modalities Grade-I Grade-II Grade-III or IV SRP Furcation plasty (Combination of Odontoplasty and Osteoplasty ) SRP Furcation plasty OFD and Grafting GTR Tunnel preparation GTR Tunnel preparation Root resection Extraction and implant Dr Jignesh

1. SRP Indicated for Grade- I and early grade- II Non-surgical therapy Dr Jignesh

Advancements in non-surgical- DeMarco curettes, diamond files, Quetin furcation curettes, and mini Five Gracey Curettes Svärdström and Wennström ( J Periodontol 2000) in the long term, furcations could be maintained over a 10-year period using NSPT . Dr Jignesh

2. Oral Hygiene Procedures meticulous oral hygiene by the patient rubber tips; periodontal aids; proxa toothbrushes. Non-surgical therapy Dr Jignesh

Furcation plasty First described by Hamp and colleagues (1975) Early Grade-II Result should be firm, well contoured papilla to cover the furcation defect. Surgical approach Dr Jignesh

Furcation plasty Odontoplasty Osteoplasty Dr Jignesh

Tunnel preparation Indicated in deep grade- II and grade- III furcation defects in mandibular molars. Long and divergent roots (no possibility of regeneration) Dr Jignesh

Regenerative procedures Gottlow et al. ( 1986) published first case rep. using GTR Most predictable results in grade- II ( Pontoriero et al. 1988 ; Lekovic et al. 1989 ; Caffesse et al. 1990) Less predictable in grade-III and maxillary grade-II ( Pontoriero et al. 1989; Pontoriero & Lindhe 1995, Metzeler et al. 1991 ) Dr Jignesh

Horizontal type of furcation defects Complex anatomy- poor debridement Poor blood supply for graft material recession of the flap margin and early exposure of both the membrane and fornix Why limited predictability ? Dr Jignesh

GTR and grafting Dr Jignesh

Advancement in regeneration e-PTFE and DFDBA Enamel matrix proteins PDGF LANAP e-PTFE membrane with b- tricalcium phosphate Dent Clin N Am - (2015) Dr Jignesh

Root resection- involves the sectioning and the removal of one or two roots of a multirooted tooth . Root separation- involves the sectioning of the root complex and the maintenance of all roots . Indicated in deep grade- III and IV. Root resection and separation Dr Jignesh

By Bassarba et al.: Teeth serving as abutments for prosthesis Severe attachment loss on a single root Teeth for which more predictable Rx is unavailable. Teeth in patients with good oral hygiene and low caries activity Indications Dr Jignesh

Poor C/R ratio on remaining roots Unfavourable anatomy of retained roots Long root trunks/ fused roots Teeth in which Endo-Restorative Rx is not possible Inability to perform oral hygiene Splinting is not possible Prosthetic factors Contraindications Dr Jignesh

root that will eliminate the furcation with greatest amount of bone/attachment loss Greatest number of anatomic problems: Curvature, grooves, accessory canals Least complicate the future periodontal maintenance Which root to remove ? Dr Jignesh

Endodontic treatment Provisional restoration Sequence of treatment ( carnevale 1981) Dr Jignesh

Root resection/ Hemisection Dr Jignesh

performed as part of the preparation of the segment for prosthetic rehabilitation, that is prior to periodontal surgery ( Carnevale et al . 1981). Dr Jignesh

4. Periodontal surgery osseous resective techniques are used to eliminate angular bone defects around the maintained roots. The provisional restoration is relined. The margins of the provisional restoration must end ≥3 mm coronal of the bone crest flaps are secured with sutures at the level of the bone crest. Dr Jignesh

5 . Final prosthetic restoration After complete soft tissue and hard tissue healing (3months) Dr Jignesh

Extraction Extraction is better in grade- III and IV. Inadequte plaque control Can’t commit to a maintenance programe High caries activity Poor socio-economic factor Dr Jignesh

In a 5‐year study, Hamp et al . (1975) observed the outcome of treatment of 175 teeth with various degrees of furcation involvementOf 32 (18%) were treated by SRP alone, (12) 49 (28 %) were subjected to furcation plasty (3) 87 teeth (50%), root resection (5) 7 teeth (4%) a tunnel had been prepared (4). Prognosis of Therapy Dr Jignesh

Hamp et al. 1992 7‐year study , 182 furcation‐ involved teeth . 57 had been treated by SRP alone 101 were treated by furcation plasty , and 24 were subjected to root resection or hemisection >85% of the furcations treated with SRP alone, or in conjunction with furcation plasty , maintained stable conditions Dr Jignesh

Carnevale et al. ( 1998) in a 10‐year prospective controlled clinical trial, demonstrated a 93% survival rate of root resected teeth similar to that of success rates of implants ( Fugazzato et al. 2001) Greater than 65-70% rate of implants placed in poorer bone quality ( Engquist , Jaffin and Berman 1991) Dr Jignesh

Recently, Huynh‐Ba et al. (2009) published a systematic review ( 22 publications ) Reported tooth survival rates Non‐surgical furcation therapy : 90.7–100% at the end of the observation period of 5–12 years . Grade- I : 99-100% Grade- II: 95% Grade- III & IV: 25% Dr Jignesh

Surgical furcation therapy (i.e. flap with or without osseous resection, gingivectomy / gingivoplasty , but not including furcation odontoplasty ): 43.1–96% at the end of an observation period of 5–53 years . Tunnel preparation : 42.9–92.9% after 5–8 years of observation . Dr Jignesh

Surgical resective therapy (i.e. root resection or root separation ): 62–100% after an observation period of 5–13 years. Reported complications were mainly root fractures and endodontic failures. Surgical regenerative therapy (i.e. GTR, bone grafts ): 62–100 % after a period of 5–12 years. horizontal furcation depth reduction in most of the cases No complete furcation closure, especially in severely involved mandibular and maxillary molars. Dr Jignesh

Conclusion No clear scientific evidence that any given treatment modality is superior to the others . Treatment modalities are more predictable for grade- I and grade- II 4 keys for long term success Dr Jignesh

Thank You Dr Jignesh

Refrences Carranza clinical Periodontology 11th edition Jan Lindhe , Clinical Periodontology and Implant dentistry:6th ed. Periodontal therapy: Clinical approaches and evidence of success: Nevins and Mellonig . Periodontal surgery a clinical atlas: N. Sato . Color atlas of cosmetic and reconstructive periodontal surgery: E. Cohen . Ponteriero and Lindhe . GTR in the treatment of degree III furcation defects in maxillary molars : JCP 1995, 22: 810-812. J zambon , Unanswered Questions Can Bone Lost from Furcations Be Regenerated?. dental clinics of north america . 2015. Dr Jignesh