Multidisciplinary approach for aesthetic rehabilitation in gummy smile and fluorosis: a case report

Nurul Jannah Zulkefle; Nur Hafizah Kamar Affendi

doi:10.46934/ijp.v3i1.131

Nurul Jannah Zulkefle Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Sungai Buloh Campus, 47000, Sungai Buloh Selangor, Malaysia Ministry of Health Malaysia
Nur Hafizah Kamar Affendi Centre of Restorative Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Sungai Buloh Campus, 47000, Sungai Buloh Selangor, Malaysia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46934/ijp.v3i1.131

Keywords: gummy smile, fluorosis, gingivectomy, veneer

Abstract

Background: Teeth, gingiva and lips are the three interrelated primary components in aesthetic dentistry. These combinations warrant a multidisciplinary approach for planning and predictable treatment outcome. Objective: The aim of this article is to describe the multidisciplinary approach for aesthetic rehabilitation involving gingivectomy and minimally invasive tooth preparation with porcelain laminate veneer (PLV) restorations and resin bonded bridge. Case: A 25-year-old female patient attended with existing space between maxillary anterior teeth post orthodontic treatment and missing mandibular anterior teeth. Intraorally, patient had uneven interdental spacing in between 13 to 23, missing 31 and 32, with merging and irregular opacities suggestive of enamel fluorosis appearance. The zenith lines were asymmetrical with short clinical crowns and disharmonious teeth axes. To optimize the aesthetic outcome and overall smile appearance, gingivectomy was performed after confirmation of biologic width. Eight weeks after healing, PLV restorations were delivered from 13 to 23, and zirconia resin bonded bridge were used to restore missing mandibular lateral incisors. Conclusion: The present case illustrates the sequential and predictable approach for management of gummy smile and fluorosis. An alternative treatment modality such as electrocautery may enhanced the smile and obtain positive outcome.

References

Hamasni FM, Majzoub ZAK. Effect of patient- and surgery-related factors on supracrestal tissue reestablish-ment after crown lengthening procedure. Quintessence Int 2019; 50 (10): 792-801.

Robbins W. Differential diagnosis and treatment of excess gingival display. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1999; 11: 265–72.

Garber DA, Salama MA. The aesthetic smile: diagnosis and treatment. Periodontol 2000 1996;11(1): 18-28.

Assaf M. Esthetic crown lengthening for upper anterior teeth: indications and surgical techniques. Int J Dent Med Res 2014;1(3):86-91.

Gargiulo A, Wentz F, Orban B. Dimensions and relations of the dentogingival junction in humans. J Periodontol 1961;32(3):261-7.

Denbesten P, Li W. Chronic fluoride toxicity: dental fluorosis. Monographs in Oral Science 2011; 22: 81–96.

da Cunha LFPL, Gonzaga CC, Furuse AYJ. Aesthetic, occlusal and periodontal rehabilitation of anterior teeth with minimum thickness porcelain laminate veneers.J Prosthet Dent 2014:1315-8.

Veneziani M. Ceramic laminate veneers: clinical procedures with a multidisciplinary approach. Int J Esthet Dent 2017;12(4):426-48.

Gurel GSN, Calamita MA, Coachman C, Morimoto S. Influence of enamel preservation on failure rates of por-celain laminate veneers. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013:31-9.

Arif RDJB, Garcia D, Yaman P. Retrospective evaluation of the clinical performance and longevity of porcelain laminate veneers 7 to 14 years after cementation. J Prosthet Dent 2018:31-7.

Magne P, Douglas WH. Rationalization of esthetic restorative dentistry based on biomimetics. J Esthet Dent 1999;11(1):5-15.

Quirynen MBC. The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of literature. J Clin Periodont 1995:1-14.

Magne P, Belser UC. Novel porcelain laminate preparation approach driven by a diagnostic mock-up. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2004;16(1):7-16.

Coachman C, Gurel G, Calamita M, Morimoto S, Paolucci B, Sesma N. The influence of tooth color on prepa-ration design for laminate veneers from a minimally invasive perspective: case report. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent 2014;34(4):453-9.

Beier USKI, Dumfahrt H. Clinical long-term evaluation and failure characteristics of 1,335 all-ceramic restora-tions. Int J Prsothodont 2012:70-8.

Soares PVSP, Carvalho VF, Souza PG, Gonzaga RC, Tolentino AB, Machado AC. Aesthetic rehabilitation with laminated ceramic veneers reinforced by lithium dislicate. Quintessence Int 2014: 129-33.

Kern M. Resin-bonded fixed dental protheses as alternative to implants in the anterior region-Age as a criterion, Implantol 2016; 24:389-98.

Sasse M, Kern M. All-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: treatment planning, clinical procedures, and outcome. Quintessence Int 2014; 45:291-7.

Kern M. Fifteen-year survival of anterior all-ceramic cantilever resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses. J Dent 2017; 56:133-5.

Kern M, Passia N, Sasse M, Yazigi C. Ten-year outcome of zirconia ceramic cantilever resin-bonded fixed den-tal prostheses and the influence of the reasons for missing incisors. J Dent 2017;65:51-5.

Denry I, Kelly JR. State of the art of zirconia for dental applications. Dent Mater 2008; 24:299-307.

Botelho MG, Chan AW, Leung NC, Lam WY. Long-term evaluation of cantilevered versus fixed- fixed resin-bonded fixed partial dentures for missing maxillary incisors. J Dent 2016; 45: 59-66.

Sasse M, Kern M. Survival of anterior cantilevered all-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses made from zirconia ceramic. J Dent 2014;42:660-6