cone beam1_2012 I case study_fixed partial denture 24 I Fig. 4_A computer-generated simulation representing a four-unit fixed partial denture supported by two implants. As illustrated by the dotted line, the tabling procedure is kept away from teeth #22 and #27. tial denture vs. implant supported fixed partial den- ture in the case of missing four lower anterior teeth. Scientifically speaking, given the diversity in our patientpopulation,withallduerespecttoourexper- tiseandexperience,thequantitativerelationshipbe- tweensuccessfuloutcomesinthetreatmentoptions discussed in this case report is unknown and awaits discovery through large prospective clinical trials. Therefore, the decision-making is not easy. The restoring dentists face the difficult task of judging the associated risk factors related to each treatment option that can affect the long-term prognosis of a chosen treatment plan. As a side note and as mentioned indirectly earlier, oral implantology has become the fastest growing segment in dentistry, and therefore, accurate un- derstanding of critical anatomical information may avoid future failure outcomes with dental implants. WhileresearchersstudyingtheseCBCTthreedimen- sional based dental imaging platforms’ methodolo- gies agree that more outcomes assessment research hasalongtermvalue,inthemeantimewemustwork together to optimize our patients’ health. To that effect, recent introduction of numerous associated cone-beam CT-based imaging systems andsurgicalguidanceplatformsaregraduallytaking ourprofessionthroughkeychangesthathavemajor impactonthewayweviewandpracticeoralimplan- tology, ultimately yielding substantial public health benefits,translatingintomorepredictableoutcomes, preservation of adjacent teeth, protection of critical anatomical landmarks, and improved esthetics and function._ _References 1. Graham R, Mihaylov S, Jepson N, Allen PF, Bond S. Determining “need” for a removable partial denture:aqualitativestudyoffactorsthatinflu- ence dentist provision and patient use. Br Dent J. 2006 Feb 11;200(3):155–158, discussion 147. 2. Christensen GJ. Three-unit fixed prostheses ver- susimplant-supportedsinglecrowns.JAmDent Assoc. 2008 Feb;139(2):191–194. 3. AlmogDM,LanniS,SolomonLW.ThePrevalence and Significance of Anatomic Variance in the Mandibular Symphysis: A Retrospective Study. J Oral Implantol 2007; 33(4):221–224. 4. Stevens MR, Emam HA, Alaily ME, Sharawy M. Implant bone rings. One-stage three-dimen- sional bone transplant technique: a case report. J Oral Implantol. 2010;36(1):69–74. Dov M. Almog, DMD Chief, Dental Service VA New Jersey Health Care System 385 Tremont Ave. East Orange, N.J. 07018 Tel. : (973) 676-1000, ext.1234 dov.almog@va.gov cone beam_contact Fig. 4