Implant-retained Complete Overdentures Research Articles

Three-dimensionally printed duplicate sleeping denture

A patient presented with a treatment plan for the replacement of his maxillary complete removable denture and mandibular implant-retained complete overdenture because of excessive wear and fracture of his existing prostheses. A digital workflow was used, and his dentures were milled from a monolithic acrylic resin disk. Upon delivery of the dentures, the patient reported that he was unable to sleep without his dentures in place although he denied a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea. After emphasizing the recommendation to remove his dentures while sleeping, it was decided to use additive manufacturing technology because of its low cost and ability to faithfully reproduce a 3-dimensional file in various biocompatible materials. The second set of sleeping dentures were 3-dimensionally printed and delivered with minimal adjustment and at a low cost.

Retention and stress distribution induced in mandibular implant-retained complete overdenture with different interimplant distance (An In-Vitro study).

Retention and stress distribution induced in mandibular implant-retained complete overdenture with different interimplant distance (An In-Vitro study).

Effect of an implant-retained complete overdenture on the hearing ability of edentulous patients: A clinical pilot study

Statement of problemEdentulism has been associated with sensoneurinal hearing reduction, but whether hearing is improved by the provision of an implant-retained overdenture is unclear. PurposeThe purpose of this pilot clinical study was to provide completely edentulous participants with implant-retained complete overdentures and to evaluate the effect on their hearing ability by pure tone audiometry (PTA). Material and methodsFifteen completely edentulous first-time denture wearers were enrolled, and their hearing was evaluated with PTA for air conduction and bone conduction at 6 time intervals: before denture insertion (R1), after denture insertion (R2), 1 month after denture insertion (R3), on the day of suture removal after implant surgery (R4), 3 months later, at the time of loading (R5), and 1 month after implant loading (R6). The Friedman test was performed to find significant differences in the measurements from the completely edentulous state to rehabilitation with a complete denture and an implant-retained complete overdenture. The post hoc Tukey test was used for multiple comparisons (α=.05). ResultsSignificant differences were found between R1 and R6, between R2 and R6, between R3 and R6, and between R4 and R6 in PTA in multiple comparisons (P<.05). The post hoc test revealed significant difference in the R1and R6 and R3 and R6 pairs (P<.05) at 500 Hz, 1 kHz, and 8 kHz, whereas only between R1 and R6 (P<.05) at 2 kHz for the air conduction test. In the bone conduction test, a significant difference was observed between the R1 and R6 and the R3 and R6 pairs (P<.05) at 500 Hz and 4 kHz, but only between R3 and R6 (P<.05) at 1 kHz and 2 kHz. ConclusionsThe study showed that the placement of dental implants improved hearing acuity via the acoustic pathway through air and bone conduction.

ORAL HEALTH RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE OF PATIENTS AFTER IMPLANT TREATMENT: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY IN A PRIVATE DENTAL PRACTICE

Introduction: Clinicians are currently unable to quantify the psychosocial, functional, and esthetic effects of prosthetic interventions to replace teeth. Understanding the effects of treatment to replace teeth on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is important.&#x0D; Aims and Objectives: This study aimed at analysing the improvement of OHRQoL of patients who underwent dental implant treatment using the “functional”, “psychosocial” and “pain and discomfort” categories of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI).&#x0D; Materials and Methods: These patients were assessed for their OHRQoL by answering a GOHAI questionnaire before implant placement and between 3 to 9 months after treatment. Gender, age, tobacco habits and potential preliminary periodontal treatment were also determined at the beginning of the study. In our study, evaluation process of OHRQol was assessed using the GOHAI questionnaire and data were collected during interviews. GOHAI comprised 12 items. For each one a score between 1 and 5 was given.&#x0D; Results: Out of 200 subjects, 125 were males and 75 females at a ratio of 1.66 to 1. The mean age was 45±2.9 years. According to the degree of oral treatment needed, the subjects were categorised as “Single Tooth” (n = 95), “Fixed Partial Denture” (n = 85; 2 to 6 teeth replaced) and “Full Prostheses” (n = 20; 10 to 14 replaced teeth). The latter category comprised “full fixed Prostheses” (n = 9) and “Implant Retained Complete Over-denture” (n = 11). The characteristics of this population did not have any statistically significant impact on GOHAIAdd scores before or after treatment. These parameters were also not associated with changes in the OHRQoL of the participants.&#x0D; Conclusion: OHRQoL was found to be improved after oral treatment by implants.&#x0D; Key Words: Implant, Oral health, Questionnaire Removable Partial Denture, Fixed Partial Denture.

Masticatory Efficiency Evaluation in Implant Retained Complete Overdenture With Different Occlusal Schemes

Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the masticatory efficiency in immediately loaded implant retained mandibular complete over denture with two different occlusal schemes namely opposing conventional maxillary complete denture. Patients and Methods: Fourteen completely edentulous patients with age ranged from 51-61 years were selected from outpatient clinic of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University. One stage octa titanium implants with 3.75mm diameter and 14mm length were used. All Patients sharing in this study receiveimmediately loaded implant reteined mandibular overdenture. They were randomly divided into two equal groups (7 patients in each), the first group had the artificial teeth arranged in a median lingualized occlusio, while the second group had the artificial teeth arranged in a bilateral balanced occlusion. Masticatory efficiency measurements weretaken at the first time of overdenture placement and after six months of over denture use. Paired t-test was used to evaluate the masticatory efficiency before and after adaptation period for each group. Independent t-test was used to compare the masticatory efficiency measurements between both groups. Results: At the time of denture placement, therewas no significance difference in masticatory efficiency measurements between both groups. Masticatory efficiency was increased considerably after six months of denture use, and it was significantly higher than masticatory efficiency recorded at the time of new prosthesis placement in the same group. After six months of denture use, therewas a significance difference in masticatory efficiency measurements between both groups. Conclusions: It was concluded that using lingualized occlusion concepts was resulted in increased masticatory efficiency more than bilateral balanced occlusion after six months of denture use in patients received immediately loaded implant retained mandibular overdenture with ball and socket attachment.

Ball-springs require more repair than bar-clip implant-supported mandibular dentures

Article Title and Bibliographic Information A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three-year results. MacEntee MI, Walton JN, Glick N. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93(1):28-37. Level of Evidence 1b Purpose/Question Which type of implant-supported mandibular denture was more satisfactory to patients, the bar-spring or the bar-clip attachment? In addition, which attachment required more maintenance? Source of Funding Government Type of Study/Design Stratified randomized controlled trial

A Clinical Trial of Patient Satisfaction and Prosthodontic Needs With Ball and Bar Attachments for Implant-Retained Complete Overdentures: Three-Year Results

A Clinical Trial of Patient Satisfaction and Prosthodontic Needs With Ball and Bar Attachments for Implant-Retained Complete Overdentures: Three-Year Results

A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three year results

A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three year results

A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: Three-year results

Few prospective trials of implant-retained mandibular dentures have evaluated the increase and duration of patient satisfaction, costs of denture maintenance in relation to different methods of attaching overdentures to implants, or the use of a reinforced framework. This report evaluates subjects' satisfaction and prosthodontic maintenance during a 3-year randomized clinical trial of implant-retained mandibular complete dentures, whether reinforced or not with a cast framework, and attached by bar-clip or 2.25-mm ball-spring matrices to endosteal dental implants. One hundred edentulous subjects, each having at least 1 year's experience with conventional complete dentures, were selected from respondents to a university dental clinic's request for volunteers. Candidates were examined to verify adequate mandibular bone and medical suitability for implants. Subjects then received 2 implants in the anterior mandible before being stratified by mandibular bone height and gender and assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatment groups. Every subject received a new maxillary complete denture in addition to an implant-supported mandibular complete denture, with or without a reinforcing framework, connected to implants by either a bar-clip or a ball-spring patrix and matrix. The dentures were adjusted and repaired as needed. Subjects indicated on a visual analogue scale (VAS) satisfaction with conventional dentures prior to the study and then with new dentures at 1 month, 1 year, and 2 years. The results reported here are from the first 68 subjects observed for 3 years after receiving new dentures (19 subjects received new dentures less than 3 years before this analysis, and another 13 subjects were lost to follow-up). VAS scores are presented in simple tables and graphs, and results for different groups were compared using 2-sided nonparametric rank tests and repeated measures ANOVA. With respect to costs and maintenance, t tests were used to compare group means. Sample size and other design considerations used a .05 significance level. After receiving new dentures with mandibular implant supports, improved satisfaction "within subject" was prompt, durable, substantial, and statistically significant, regardless of the attachment mechanism, and with or without a reinforcing framework. In contrast, there were no notable satisfaction differences between the 2 attachment mechanisms, or with the presence or absence of a reinforcing framework, either at specific intervals after receiving the new dentures, or in repeated measures ANOVA. For both attachment groups, most denture adjustments occurred during the first year. This accounted for 81% of total adjustments during 3 years, when the 34 subjects in the ball-spring group and the 34 in the bar-clip group were combined. The mean numbers of adjustments per subject and associated clinical times did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Conversely, denture repairs declined more slowly than adjustments. Almost all repairs (90%) occurred in the ball-spring group to correct problems with the attachments, 39% in the first year, and tapering off only slightly in the following 2 years. Over 3 years of follow-up, mean numbers of repairs per subject differed significantly between groups: 6.7 repairs per person in the ball-spring group, compared to 0.8 in the bar-clip group ( P<.001), and mean time per appointment was greater for repairs in the ball-spring group: 18.9 minutes compared to 16.9 ( P<.01). The cast framework had no influence on the satisfaction expressed or on adjustments and repairs. Subjects were very satisfied with the new dentures, although the ball-spring attachment tested in this trial required substantially more repairs.