Tactile Sensibility of Single‐Tooth Implants and Natural Teeth Under Local Anesthesia of the Natural Antagonistic Teeth |
| |
| Authors: | Norbert Enkling Dr. med. dent. Stefan Heussner Dr. med. dent. Claudia Nicolay Dr. rer. nat. Stefan Bayer Dr. med. dent. Regina Mericske‐Stern Prof. Dr. med. dent. Karl‐Heinz Utz Prof. Dr. med. dent. |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Assistant professor and vice chair, Department of Prosthodontics, University of Bern, Switzerland;2. assistant professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University of Bonn, Germany;3. senior research fellow, Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Germany;4. professor and chair, Department of Prosthodontics, University of Bern, Switzerland;5. associate professor and vice chair, Department of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University of Bonn, Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | Introduction and Aim: The term osseoperception describes the capability of developing a subtle tactile sensibility over dental implants. The present clinical study aims at clarifying the question of how far tactile sensibility is to be attributed to the periodontium of the natural opposing tooth of the implant. Material and Method: Thirty‐two subjects with single‐tooth implants with natural opposing teeth were included in this clinical, single‐blind, split‐mouth study. The natural antagonistic tooth of the implant and the corresponding natural contralateral tooth were anesthetized with a locally infiltrated articaine anesthetic. In a computer‐assisted and randomized way, copper foils of varying thickness (0–100 µm) were placed interocclusally between the single‐tooth implant and the natural opposing tooth, and between the contralateral pair of natural opposing teeth in order to investigate the active tactile sensibility according to the psychophysical method of constant stimuli and evaluate it statistically by the Weibull distribution. Results: The average tactile sensibility of the implants with anesthetized antagonists at the 50% value calculated by means of the Weibull distribution was 20 ± 11 µm with a support area (90%–10% value) of 77 ± 89 µm. For the pair of natural teeth, the tactile sensibility at the 50% value was 16 ± 9 µm with a support area of 48.4 ± 93 µm. This resulted in an average intraindividual difference of 3.5 ± 7 µm at the 50% value and 29 ± 93 µm in the support area. The statistical calculations demonstrated an equivalent tactile sensibility (50% value) of the single‐tooth implant and the contralateral natural control tooth with the natural antagonists being anesthetized in each case (double t‐test, equivalence limit ± 8 µm, P < 0.01, power >80%). Conclusion: Apparently, the active tactile sensibility of single‐tooth implants with natural opposing teeth is not only to be attributed to the periodontium of the opposing tooth but also to a perception over the implant itself. This could support the hypothesis according to which the implant may have a tactile sensibility of its own. |
| |
| Keywords: | active tactile sensibility of dental implants interocclusal perception of teeth and implants osseoperception single‐blinded randomized clinical split‐mouth trial steepness of the sensibility curve support area tactile sensibility under anesthesia |
|
|
