The Aesthetic Challenge: Three-Dimensional Planning Concepts for the Anterior Maxillary Aesthetic Zone

  • Scott D. GanzEmail author


Patients who are missing teeth in the anterior maxillary aesthetic zone present difficult challenges for both the surgical and restorative clinician due to the fact that every patient presents with a unique and individual anatomical condition. The diagnostic information necessary to properly plan a surgical and restorative treatment should include, but not limited to, (1) intraoral periapical radiographs, (2) maxillary and mandibular impressions, (3) bite relationship/occlusion, (4) lip position/lip support, (5) smile-line, (6) soft tissue volume and biotype, and (7) three-dimensional imaging modalities such as computed tomography (CT) and the rapidly evolving cone beam CT (CBCT). Three-dimensional imaging and interactive treatment planning software is proving to be the modality of choice providing an increased number of diagnostic tools which can dramatically improve the ability for clinicians to assess the issues that present with each patient, especially in the aesthetic zone of the maxillary arch. These new tools have helped to redefine the workflow required to assess and plan each case and have created new paradigms and treatment protocols that will continue to be refined as the technology evolves. The ability to combine digital optical and intraoral scanning technologies with 3-D imaging helps to refine the process and increase accuracy when surgical guides are indicated. As technology improves, so will the clinician’s ability to provide enhanced treatment for patients in need.


Aesthetic implant 3-D planning CBCT 3-D imaging Optical scanning Lip lift Digital workflow 


  1. Aghaloo TL, Moy PK (2007) Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22(Suppl):49–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Amet EM, Ganz SD (1997) Functional and aesthetic acceptance prior to computerized tomography or implant placement. Implant Dent 6(3., Fall):193–197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Angelopoulos C, Aghaloo T (2011) Imaging technology in implant diagnosis. Dent Clin N Am 55(1):141–158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Araryarachkul P, Caruso J, Gantes B, Schulz E, Riggs M, Dus I, Yamada J, Crigger M (2005) Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 2. Quantitative cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 20:416–424Google Scholar
  5. Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Ozdemir T (2010) Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. J Periodontol 81(1):43–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Behneke N (2012) Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone beam CT-derived template-based implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(4):416–423PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Benavides E, Rios HF, Ganz SD, An CH, Resnik R, Reardon GT, Feldman SJ, Mah JK, Hatcher D, Kim MJ, Sohn DS, Palti A, Perel ML, Judy KW, Misch CE, Wang HL (2012) Use of cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists consensus report. Implant Dent 21(2):78–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Benington PC, Khambay BS, Ayoub AF (2010) An overview of three-dimensional imaging in dentistry. Dent Update 37(8):494–496. 499–500, 503–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Berco M, Rigali PH Jr, Miner RM, DeLuca S, Anderson NK, Will LA (2009) Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 136(1):17. e1-9; discussion 17-8Google Scholar
  10. Borrow W, Smith Justin P (1996) Stent marker materials for computerized tomograph-assisted implant planning. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent 16:61–67Google Scholar
  11. Chan HL, Misch K, Wang HL (2010) Dental imaging in implant treatment planning. Implant Dent 19(4):288–298PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen ST, Buser D (2014) Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla – a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(Suppl):186–215Google Scholar
  13. Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Boisco M (2006) Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 17(Suppl 2):136–159. ReviewPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M (2009) Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(Suppl):237–259PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cosyn J, Eghbali A, De Bruyn H, Collys K, Cleymaet R, De Rouck T (2011) Immediate single-tooth implants in the anterior maxilla: 3-year results of a case series on hard and soft tissue response and aesthetics. J Clin Periodontol 38(8):746–753PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Danza M, Zollino I, Carinci F (2009) Comparison between implants inserted with and without computer planning and custom model coordination. J Craniofac Surg 20(4):1086–1092PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR (2009) Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38(6):609–625. Epub 2009 May 21. ReviewPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Di Giacomo GA, Cury PR, de Araujo NS, Sendyk WR, Sendyk CL (2005) Clinical application of stereolithographic surgical guides for implant placement: preliminary results. J Periodontol 76(4):503–507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dreiseidler T, Mischkowski RA, Neugebauer J, Ritter L, Zöller JE (2009) Comparison of cone-beam imaging with orthopantomography and computerized tomography for assessment in presurgical implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(2):216–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dula K, Mini R, van der Stelt PF, Buser D (2001) The radiographic assessment of implant patients: decision-making criteria. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 16(1):80–89PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Eggers G, Patellis E, Mühling J (2009) Accuracy of template-based dental implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(3):447–454PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ersoy AE, Turkyilmaz I, Ozan O, McGlumphy EA (2008) Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants. J Periodontol 79(8):1339–1345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Farley NE, Kennedy K, McGlumphy EA, Clelland NL (2013) Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28(2):563–572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Ganz SD (2001) CT scan technology – an evolving tool for predictable implant placement and restoration. Int Mag Oral Implantol Vol. 1:6–13Google Scholar
  25. Ganz SD (2003) Use of stereolithographic models as diagnostic and restorative aids for predictable immediate loading of implants. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 15(10):763–771PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Ganz SD (2005a) Use of conventional CT and cone beam for improved dental diagnostics and implant planning. AADMRT Newsletter, Spring Issue. (AADMRT)Google Scholar
  27. Ganz SD (2005b) Presurgical planning with CT-derived fabrication of surgical guides. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63((9), Supplement 2):59–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ganz SD (2005c) Conventional CT and cone beam CT for improved dental diagnostics and implant planning. Dent Implantol Updat 16(12):85Google Scholar
  29. Ganz SD (2006a) Techniques for the use of CT imaging for the fabrication of surgical guides. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am., Elsevier Saunders 14:75–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ganz SD (2006b) The reality of anatomy and the triangle of bone. Inside Dent 2(5):72–77Google Scholar
  31. Ganz SD (2006c) The reality of anatomy and the triangle of bone. Inside dentistry. Proceedings of ICOI World Congress XXIV. Suppl Implant Dent 14:182–191Google Scholar
  32. Ganz SD (2007a) 3-D imaging and cone beam CT is “Where the Action is!” inside. Dentistry 2007:102–103Google Scholar
  33. Ganz SD (2007b) CT-derived model-based surgery for immediate loading of maxillary anterior implants. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 19(5):311–318PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Ganz SD (2008a) Using interactive technology: “In the Zone with the Triangle of Bone.”. Dent Implantol Updat 19(5):33–38. quiz p1Google Scholar
  35. Ganz SD (2008b) Defining new paradigms for assessment of implant receptor sites – The use of CT/CBCT and interactive virtual treatment planning for congenitally missing lateral incisors. Compend Cont Educ Dent 29(5):256–267Google Scholar
  36. Ganz SD (2008c) Restoratively driven implant dentistry utilizing advanced software and CBCT: realistic abutments and virtual teeth. Dent Today 27(7):122. 124, 126–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Ganz SD (2008d) Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing applications using CT and cone beam CT scanning technology. Dent Clin N Am 52(4):777–808PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Ganz SD (2009a) Advances in diagnosis and treatment planning utilizing CT scan technology for improving surgical and restorative implant reconstruction: tools of empowerment. In: Jokstad A (ed) Osseointegration and dental implants. Wiley-Blackwell, Iowa, pp 88–116Google Scholar
  39. Ganz SD (2009b) Advanced case planning with SimPlant. In: Tardieu P, Al R (eds) The art of computer-guided implantology. Quintessence Publishing, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  40. Ganz SD (2009c) Bone grafting assessment: focus on the anterior and posterior maxilla utilizing advanced 3-D imaging technologies. Dent Implantol Updat 20(6):41–48Google Scholar
  41. Ganz SD (2010a) Implant complications associated with two- and three dimensional diagnostic imaging technologies. In: Froum SJ (ed) Dental implant complications – etiology, prevention, and treatment. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, pp 71–99Google Scholar
  42. Ganz SD (2010b) The use of CT/CBCT and interactive virtual treatment planning and the triangle of bone: defining new paradigms for assessment of implant receptor sites. In: Babbush CHJ, Krauser J, Rosenlicht J (eds) Dental implants – The art and science. Saunders Maryland Heights, Missouri, pp 146–166Google Scholar
  43. Ganz SD (2012) Utilization of three-dimensional imaging technology to enhance maxillofacial surgical applications. In: Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen P, Waite P (eds) Peterson’s principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery. People’s Medical House-USA, Shelton, pp 179–200Google Scholar
  44. Ganz SD (2013) Dental implantology: an evolving treatment modality. Compend Contin Educ Dent 34(8):628–629PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Ganz SD (2015a) Three-dimensional imaging and guided surgery for dental implants. Dent Clin N Am 59(2):265–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Ganz SD (2015b) Diagnostic imaging for patient evaluation and minimally invasive treatment planning. In: Cullum D, Deporter D (eds) Minimally invasive dental implant surgery. Wilessy-Blackwell, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  47. Guerrero ME, Jacobs R, Loubele M, Schutyser F, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D (2006) State-of-the-art on cone beam CT imaging for preoperative planning of implant placement. Clin Oral Investig 10:1–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Haney E, Gansky SA, Lee JS, Johnson E, Maki K, Miller AJ, Huang JC (2010) Comparative analysis of traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography volumetric images in the diagnosis and treatment planning of maxillary impacted canines. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 137(5):590–597Google Scholar
  49. Harris D, Buser D, Dula K et al (2002) E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. A consensus work-shop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration in Trinity College Dublin. Clin Oral Implants Res 13:566–570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Hof M, Pommer B, Ambros H, Jesch P, Vogl S, Zechner W (2015) Does timing of implant placement affect implant therapy outcome in the aesthetic zone? A clinical, radiological, aesthetic, and patient-based evaluation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 17(6):1188–1199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Jabero M, Sarment DP (2006) Advanced surgical guidance technology: a review. Implant Dent 15(2):135–142. ReviewPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Jacobs R, Adriansens A, Verstreken K, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D (1999) Predictability of a three-dimensional planning system for oral implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 28(2):105–111PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Jamali AA, Deuel C, Perreira A, Salgado CJ, Hunter JC, Strong EB (2007) Linear and angular measurements of computer-generated models: are they accurate, valid, and reliable? Comput Aided Surg 12(5):278–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH (2010) Gingival biotype assessment in the esthetic zone: visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 30(3):237–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kan JY, Roe P, Rungcharassaeng K, Patel RD, Waki T, Lozada JL, Zimmerman G (2011) Classification of sagittal root position in relation to the anterior maxillary osseous housing for immediate implant placement: a cone beam computed tomography study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26(4):873–876PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Kan JY, Roe P, Rungcharassaeng K (2015) Effects of implant morphology on rotational stability during immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30(3):667–670PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kang SH, Kim MK, Kim HJ, Zhengguo P, Lee SH (2014a) Accuracy assessment of image-based surface meshing for volumetric computed tomography images in the craniofacial region. J Craniofac Surg 25(6):2051–2055PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Kang SH, Lee JW, Lim SH, Kim YH, Kim MK (2014b) Dental image replacement on cone beam computed tomography with three-dimensional optical scanning of a dental cast, occlusal bite, or bite tray impression. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43(10):1293–1301PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Klein M, Abrams M (2001) Computer-guided surgery utilizing a computer-milled surgical template. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 13(2):165–169. quiz 170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Klein M, Cranin AN, Sirakian A (1993) A Computerized Tomographic (CT) scan appliance for optimal presurgical and pre-prosthetic planning of the implant patient. Prac Periodont Asethet Dent 5:33–39Google Scholar
  61. Lal K, White GS, Morea DN, Wright RF (2006) Use of stereolithographic templates for surgical and prosthodontic implant planning and placement. Part I. The concept. J Prosthodont 15(1):51–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Lam EW, Ruprecht A, Yang J (1995) Comparison of two-dimensional orthoradially reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography for dental implant treatment planning. J Prosthet Dent 74:42–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Lanis A, Álvarez Del Canto O (2015) The combination of digital surface scanners and cone beam computed tomography technology for guided implant surgery using 3Shape implant studio software: a case history report. Int J Prosthodont 28(2):169–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Lee CY, Ganz SD, Wong N, Suzuki JB (2012) Use of cone beam computed tomography and a laser intraoral scanner in virtual dental implant surgery: part 1. Implant Dent 21(4):265–271PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Lee CY, Wong N, Ganz SD, Mursic J, Suzuki JB (2015) Use of an intraoral laser scanner during the prosthetic phase of implant dentistry: a pilot study. J Oral Implantol 41(4):e126–e132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Mischkowski RA, Ritter L, Neugebauer J, Dreiseidler T, Keeve E, Zöller JE (2007) Diagnostic quality of panoramic views obtained by a newly developed digital volume tomography device for maxillofacial imaging. Quintessence Int 38(9):763–772PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Mol A, Balasundaram A (2008) In vitro cone beam computed tomography imaging of periodontal bone. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37(6):319–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Moreira CR, Sales MA, Lopes PM, Cavalcanti MG (2009) Assessment of linear and angular measurements on three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographic images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 108(3):430–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Nairn NJ, Ayoub AF, Barbenel J, Moos K, Naudi K, Ju X, Khambay BS (2013) Digital replacement of the distorted dentition acquired by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT): a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42(11):1488–1493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Nickenig HJ, Eitner S (2007) Reliability of implant placement after virtual planning of implant positions using cone beam CT data and surgical (guide) templates. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 35(4–5):207–211. Epub 2007 Jun 18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Norton MR, Ganeles J, Ganz SD, Stumpel LJ, Schmidt JM (2010) 2010 Guidelines of the Academy of Osseointegration for the provision of dental implants and associated patient care. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25(3):620–627Google Scholar
  72. Orentlicher G, Goldsmith D, Horowitz A (2009) Computer-generated implant planning and surgery: case select. Compend Contin Educ Dent 30(3):162–166. 168–73PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Orentlicher G, Goldsmith D, Horowitz A (2010) Applications of 3-dimensional virtual computerized tomography technology in oral and maxillofacial surgery: current therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68(8):1933–1959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Ozan O, Turkyilmaz I, Ersoy AE, McGlumphy EA, Rosenstiel SF (2009) Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67(2):394–401Google Scholar
  75. Rinaldi M, Ganz SD, Mottola A (2015) Computer-guided applications for dental implants, bone grafting, and reconstructive surgery. Elsevier, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  76. Roe P, Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Caruso JM, Zimmerman G, Mesquida J (2012) Horizontal and vertical dimensional changes of peri-implant facial bone following immediate placement and provisionalization of maxillary anterior single implants: a 1-year cone beam computed tomography study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27(2):393–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Rosenfeld AL, Mecall RA (1996) Use of interactive computed tomography to predict the esthetic and functional demands of implant-supported prostheses. Compend Contin Educ Dent 17:1125–1146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Rosenfeld AL, Mecall RA (1998) Use of prosthesis-generated computed tomographic information for diagnostic and surgical treatment planning. J Esthet Dent 10:132–148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Rosenfeld A, Mandelaris G, Tardieu P (2006) Prosthetically directed placement using computer software to insure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part1: diagnostics, imaging, and collaborative accountability. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 26:215–221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Rothman SLG (1998) Computerized tomography of the enhanced alveolar ridge. In: Dental applications of computerized tomography. Quintessence Publishing Co, Chicago, pp 87–112Google Scholar
  81. Rugani P, Kirnbauer B, Arnetzl GV, Jakse N (2009) Cone beam computerized tomography: basics for digital planning in oral surgery and implantology. Int J Comput Dent 12(2):131–145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Scherer MD (2014) Presurgical implant-site assessment and restoratively driven digital planning. Dent Clin N Am 58(3):561–595PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Sonick M (1994) A comparison of the accuracy of periapical, panoramic, and computed tomographic radiographs in locating the mandibular canal. JOMI 9:455–460Google Scholar
  84. Tahmaseb A, De Clerck R, Wismeijer D (2009) Computer-guided implant placement: 3D planning software, fixed intraoral reference points, and CAD/CAM technology. A case report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(3):541–546PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W (2014) Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(Suppl):25–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, Ganz SD, Hildebolt C, Scarfe WC (2012) American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 113(6):817–826PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Valente F, Schiroli G, Sbrenna A (2009) Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(2):234–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Verstreken K, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Martens K, Marchal G, van Steenberghe D, Suetens P (1998) An image-guided planning system for endosseous oral implants. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 17(5):842–852PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Restorative DentistryRutgers School of Dental MedicineFort LeeUSA
  2. 2.Private PracticeFort LeeUSA

Personalised recommendations