Dentistry – Prosthodontics – Holding or positioning denture in mouth
Reexamination Certificate
2001-07-13
2002-06-18
O'Connor, Cary E. (Department: 3732)
Dentistry
Prosthodontics
Holding or positioning denture in mouth
Reexamination Certificate
active
06406295
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to dental implants, and more particularly to establishing identity of implants and associated peripheral components, for the purpose of assuring that compatible components are utilized in dental procedures as peripheral components are installed and subsequently replaced with others.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The field of dental implants has grown greatly in recent years. As part of this trend, the number of components of an implant has increased. Implants, healing caps, impression copings, and restorative abutments are all utilized at various stages of the implant procedure. An implant may vary in diameter and also in the nature of mechanical connection to its associated components, as well as in other ways. Each one of these variations requires corresponding variation in structure of its associated components. Healing caps and impression copings may vary in height, width, and contour. It becomes apparent then, that the total number of different components of an uncomplicated system of dental components rises in the scores.
It is not an easy matter to distinguish among the many variations of components. This becomes necessary when it comes time to remove a component and install a different type of component as the implant procedure progresses. Difficulties in successful identification arise firstly, from the size of the components. Overall length of these components may be on the order of three eights of an inch (nine mm), and visual identification is not readily accomplished. For example, identifying a healing cap or abutment which is 5.0 mm in diameter from an abutment 6.0 mm in diameter may possibly not be accomplished without having a reference abutment at hand for ready comparison. Another problem is that a dental practitioner may not practice implant procedures frequently. This results in reduced familiarity with implant components by both the practitioner and his or her support personnel who may be tasked with cleaning, sterilizing, sorting, and dispensing implant components.
There exists a need in the implant art for rendering the many varieties of implant components readily recognizable primarily by visual inspection. Color has been utilized for this purpose in the dental arts. Examples are seen in U.S. Pat. No. 5,104,322, issued to Moo C. You on Apr. 14, 1992, U.S. Pat. No. 5,289,919, issued to Dan E. Fischer on Mar. 1, 1994, U.S. Pat. No. 5,919,042, issued to Michael O. Williams on Jul. 6, 1999, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,941,706, issued to Robert S. Ura on Aug. 24, 1999. You utilizes color to differentiate among different root canal sealers. Fischer utilizes color to differentiate among different delivery tips for syringes. Williams provides graduation marks in an orthodontic expanding and positioning appliance to indicate adjusted length thereof. Ura sets forth root canal cleaners and sealers which utilize color coding to indicate size thereof. None of these schemes relates to identifying associated members of families of implant components, as seen in the present invention.
Current practice in the field of implants has utilized color for identifying associated implant components, but only to a limited degree which does not solve the problem of recognizing appropriate components of an implant throughout the term of the procedure. Illustratively, Implant Innovations, Inc., of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, has identified certain implant components by color, other components being undifferentiated by color. Still other parameters are also identified by color. Namely, angle of a prosthetic component is identified by color. Healing caps are identified by placing numbers on the top to indicate height and width of the abutment, and width of the corresponding implant. However, numerical designations are utilized for more than one parameter, which practice obviously can potentially be confusing. Furthermore, corresponding impression copings are not identified for compatibility in this scheme. It should be noted that both colors and numbers are utilized to indicate more than one type of characteristic. By contrast, in the present invention, colors are reserved for only one characteristic or parameter, and symbols such as numerals are reserved exclusively for another characteristic or parameter.
Other known schemes utilize color to identify width of the implant, but do not extend the identification scheme to components which are typically used in an implant procedure. Steri-Oss, of Yorba Linda, Calif., identifies implant width by color, with corresponding healing caps, and prosthetic components sharing the coloring scheme. Steri-Oss does not indicate height of components, by contrast with the present invention.
Lifecore Biomedical, of Chaska, Minn., identifies diameter of healing caps by letters, cuff height by numerals and flare diameter by a different set of numerals. Friatec of Irvine, Calif. indicates diameter of the implant by color.
Straumann Dental, of Waltham, Mass., utilizes color to identify implant diameters, one variety of abutment (a wide necked abutment), and implant insertion depth. Ace Surgical Supply Company, Inc., of Brockton, Mass., color codes self-tapping fixture mounts and etches implants and temporary healing caps with numbers to indicate implant head diameter. Paragon Implant Co., of Encino, Calif., identifies diameter of fixture mounts, impression copings, and restorative components by color. Healing caps are not included in the color coding scheme.
The prior art systems fail to identify all of the critical characteristics or parameters of healing caps and impression copings, which are handled by all dental practitioners who may participate in an implant procedure. These may include a surgical specialist who conducts the initial implantation of a permanent implant which will subsequently be utilized as a foundation to receive a permanent dental crown, and a restorative dentist, who places the crown on the implant. The prior art systems may also fail to assist support staff who must order, organize, sort, select, and perform other tasks with the many, small components of an extensive system of implant components.
As a consequence, many errors can arise from inability to perceive configurational characteristics of implant components. For example, it would be feasible for an impression coping of incorrect width to be used on any given implant in the absence of positive identification. This can lead to a mismatch of the restorative implant platform and the restoration. Restorations not fully occupying the platform will be less stable and more prone to accumulate dental plaque. In the opposite situation, wherein the restoration extends beyond the restorative platform, an inaccessible area below the restoration is created that is difficult if not impossible to clean adequately. Other consequences of mismatches include but are not necessarily limited to discomfort to the patient, poor esthetic results, and potential food impaction.
Inability to readily discriminate among implant components further impacts upon efficiency of a dental practice. Because the components are precisely machined, typically from titanium, they are quite expensive. Titanium has very good resistance to degradation in the environment of the human body, and because many components are utilized only temporarily over a period of months, components are often reusable. They may be cleaned, sterilized, and restored to inventory. In prior art systems, there exists a considerable potential for both dentists and dental auxiliary personnel to misidentify and mislabel implant components. Appropriate identification is laboriously accomplished given the small size of typical implant components. Identification of these components therefore imposes a significant burden in time on a dental practice, with attendant increased costs.
In current practice, a typical system may have as many as four nominal implant widths. Thus, a typical system may have at least thirty-six possible healing caps and twelve possible impression
Hill Andrew M.
O'Connor Cary E.
LandOfFree
Identification of dental implant components does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Identification of dental implant components, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Identification of dental implant components will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2901492