Page 42 - The Beauty and Sorrow in Endodontics (Chapter 4 - Part 2)

Fig 50D
10 days prior to the initial consultation, the patient

had gone to another implant specialist for a second
opinion. The specialist reported no concerns with
#
the implant placed at 47 site but recommended
#
endodontic consultation for 46.

Fig 50E

Comparing the images from before and after
implant placement, although the obturation of

#
#
tooth 45 and 46 are less than ideal, there were
no signs of any apical lesion or cracks and fractures
over the past year.

Fig 50F
Comparing the images from before and after implant
placement, there were no obvious changes of the
#
coronal structures or attachment apparatus of 35,
#
#
# 36, 37. Tooth 37 had supererupted due to the lack
of opposing contact. The patient reported sensitivity
#
to percussion on 36 and radiographic examination
revealed widening of the apical PDL (possibly due to
concentrated occlusal force on the tooth).

Fig 50G

#
Prior to implant placement, even though teeth 16,
# 15, 14 had large restorations, they also had intact
#
PDL and no obvious bone loss.

75