Dear Editor,

Rutkowski and Iyer’s question of the “most suitable occlusion” for implant rehabilitation seems premature since we have yet to answer that question for ordinary restorative dentistry. Occlusion has the reputation of being the most crucial subject in dentistry but also the most controversial. After all these years, what seems to be the problem? I want to offer a plausible explanation, comment on several points in the article, and suggest guidelines to ensure longevity for postimplant reconstructions.

A simple answer is evasive because over the years, the word’s meaning has changed from an adjective describing teeth closure to a noun understanding of the masticatory system itself. The circumstances that led to this transformation began when dentists were confronted with the damaging lateral forces of bruxism. They focused solely on management because there was insufficient information regarding bruxism’s etiology to assume a proactive approach. They discovered that by...

You do not currently have access to this content.