Comparison of marginal bone loss in implant supported over dentures in early loading
An original research
Keywords:
attachment systems, mandibular single-implant overdentures, wide diameter implantsAbstract
Aim: The purpose of the present research was to evaluate the marginal bone loss in implant supported over-dentures in case of early loading on denture. Methodology: 36 edentulous participants (mean age 68 years, SD 9.2) were randomly assigned into three treatment groups (n¼12). A single implant was placed in the mandibular midline of participants to support an overdenture using a 6-week loading protocol. The control group received Southern regular implants and standard ball attachments. One group received Southern 8-mm-wide implants and large ball attachments. Another group received Neoss regular implants and Locator attachments. SPSS was used to determine between groups differences in marginal bone loss, implant stability, implant, and prosthodontic success (P<0.05). Results: Implant success after 1 year was 75% for Southern regular implant (control) group; and 100% for the Southern wide and Neoss regular implant groups (P¼0.038). Prosthodontic success was comparable between the groups but the maintenance (41 events overall, mean 1.2) was greater for the Locator and the standard ball attachments. Conclusion: Mandibular single-implant overdentures are a successful treatment option for older edentulous adults with early loading protocol using implants of different diameters and with different attachment systems.
Downloads
References
Albrektsson T, Zarb GA. The branemark osseointegrated implant. QuintessencePub. Co.; 1989.
Alsabeeha, N., Payne, A.G., De Silva, R.K. & Swain, M.V. (2009) Mandibular single-implant overdentures: a review with surgical and prosthodontic perspectives of a novel approach. Clinical Oral Implants Research 20: 356–365.
Al-Zubeidi MI, Alsabeeha NHM, Thomson WM, Payne AGT. Patient satisfac-tion and dissatisfaction with mandibular two-implant overdentures usingdifferent attachment systems: 5-year outcomes. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res2012;14:696–707.
Carlsson, G., Kronstrom, M., de Baat, C., Cune, M., Davis, D., Garefis, P., Heo, S.J., Jokstad, A., Matsuura, M., Narhi, T., Ow, R., Pissiotis, A., Sato, H. & Zarb, G. (2004) A survey of the use of mandibular implant overdentures in 10 countries. International
Cordioli, G., Majzoub, Z. & Castagna, S. (1997) Mandibular overdentures anchored to single implants: a five year prospective study. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 78: 159–165.
Cordioli, G., Majzoub, Z. & Castagna, S. (1997) Mandibular overdentures anchored to single implants: a five year prospective study. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 78: 159–165.
Davis, D.M. & Packer, M.E. (2000) The maintenance requirements of mandibular overdentures stabilized by astra tech implants using three different attachment mechanisms–balls, magnets, and bars; 3-year results. European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry 8: 131–134.
Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM. Patient satisfaction with two designsof implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets.Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1293–8.
Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. TheMcGill consensus statement on overdentures. Gerodontology 2002;19:1–3.
Gallucci GO, Beni´c GI. Consensus statements and clinical recommendations forimplant loading protocols. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:2–5.
Ganeles J, Zöllner A, Jackowski J, Ten Bruggenkate C, Beagle J, Guerra F. Imme-diate and early loading of Straumann implants with a chemically modifiedsurface (SLActive) in the posterior mandible and maxilla: 1-year results from aprospective multicenter study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:1119–28.
Jacobson, T. & Krol, A. (1983a) A contemporary review of the factors involved in complete denture retention, stability, and support. Part 1: retention. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 49: 5–15.
Jacobson, T. & Krol, A. (1983b) A contemporary review of the factors involved in complete dentures. Part 2: stability. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 49: 165–172.
Jemt, T., Chai, J., Harnett, J., Heath, M., Hutton, J., Johns, R., McKenna, S., McNamara, D., van Steenberghe, D., Taylor, R., Watson, R. & Herrmann, I. (1996) A 5-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 11: 291–298.
a. Journal of Prosthodontics 17: 211–217.
Kleis, W.K., Kammerer, P.W., Hartmann, S., Al-Nawas, B. & Wagner, W. (2009) A comparison of three different attachment systems for mandibular two implant overdentures: one-year report. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research doi: CID154 [pii]10.1111/j.17088208.2009.00154.x.
Kuoppala R, Ritva Näpänkangas AR. Quality of life of patients treatedwith implant-supported mandibular overdentures evaluated with the OralHealth Impact Profile (OHIP-14): a survey of 58 patients. J Oral MaxillofacRes 2013;4:1–6.
Mericske-stern R. Clinical evaluation of overdenture restorations supported byosseointegrated titanium implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral MaxillofacImplants 1990;5:375–83.
Mericske-Stern, R. & Zarb, G. (1993) Overdentures: an alternative implant methodology for edentulous patients. International Journal of Prosthodontics 6: 203–208.
Payne, A., Tawse-Smith, A., Kumara, R. & Thomson, W. (2001a) One-year prospective evaluation of the early loading of unsplinted conical bra°nemark fixtures with mandibular overdentures immediately following surgery. Clinical Implant Dentistry & Related Research 3: 9–19.
Taylor TD, Agar JR, Vogiatzi T. Implant prosthodontics: current perspective andfuture directions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:66–75. Available from:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10697941.
Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, et al. Mandibulartwo implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care foredentulous patients—the York consensus statement. Br Dent J 2009;207:185–6.Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.728.
Watson, R.M., Jemt, T.,Chai, J.,Harnett, J.,Heath, M.R., Hutton, J.E., Johns, R.B., Lithner, B., McKenna, S., McNamara, D.C., Naert, I.& Taylor, R. (1997) Prosthodontic treatment, patient response, and the need for maintenance of complete implant-supported overdentures: an appraisal of 5 years of prospective study. International Journal of Prosthodontics 10: 345–354.
Weber H, Morton D, Gallucci GO, Roccuzzo M, Cordaro L, Grütter L. Group 3consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding loadingprotocols. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:180–4.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2022 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
