Effect of 2-implant mandibular overdenture with different attachments and loading protocols on peri-implant health and prosthetic complications: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Attachment systems for mandibular implant-supported overdentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Although mandibular implant-supported overdentures have been highly recommended as a treatment option, a consensus on the type of attachment systems that can be used to increase implant and prostheses survivability is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare different types of attachments for retention by investigating outcome measures such as implant and prosthesis survival rates and biological and prosthesis complications in participants with a mandibular implant-supported overdenture.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The search was performed in the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021253566). An analysis of association was conducted between different attachment systems and implant and overdenture survival rates in randomized controlled clinical trials.

RESULTS

The initial search indicated 477 studies, of which 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for analysis. A total of 2154 implants and 737 overdentures were analyzed in the meta-analysis. The main results indicated the failure rate for dental implants to be 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.2) and overdentures 4.2% (95% CI, 1.6 to 10.5), respectively. With regard to different attachment systems, a similar failure rate was identified with bar-type retention (7.7% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.1), magnetic retention systems (7.6% to 95% CI, 2.2 to 22.7), and ball-type retention (6.8% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 14.3). No significant difference was found in biological complications for splinted and unsplinted implant overdentures (P=.902). Regarding prosthetic complications, the most favorable groups were LOCATOR attachments followed by telescopic and Conus, bar, and ball attachments. Magnet attachments had higher prosthetic complications (7.4 times) than the other attachments.

CONCLUSIONS

Implants and implant-supported mandibular overdentures showed a high survival rate irrespective of the attachment system used. Splinting implants did not significantly affect the rate of biological complications. Prosthetic complications were most common for magnet and least common for LOCATOR attachments.

Factors and clinical outcomes for standard and mini-implants retaining mandibular overdentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Standard-diameter dental implants are not always applicable because of anatomic limitations of the residual ridge. Thus, mini-implants have been increasingly used and offer an alternative. However, data regarding prosthetic complications, maintenance factors, and clinical outcomes are limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare prosthetic complications and maintenance events and clinical outcomes in residual ridges rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures (IODs) by using standard implants or mini-implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nine electronic databases were searched. Quantitative analyses to measure the risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were applied. Those methods were used to assess prosthetic complications and maintenance events (abutment adjustments, replacement of retentive element, occlusal adjustment, and overdenture fracture) and clinical outcomes related to postoperative pain, probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), marginal bone loss (MBL), and implant survival rate.

RESULTS

Altogether, 7 publications were selected. Mini-implants presented reduced abutment adjustments (RR 0.23 [0.07, 0.73], P=.01), replacement of retentive element (RR 0.41 [0.31, 0.54], P<.001), occlusal adjustment (RR 0.53 [0.31, 0.91], P=.02), and overdenture fracture (RR 0.46 [0.23, 0.94], P=.03) compared with standard implants. Additionally, mini-implants presented lower values for PI at 6 months (SMD -0.27 [-0.47, -0.08], P=.006) and 12 months (SMD -0.25 [-0.46, -0.05], P=.01). No additional tangible differences were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Mini-implants might be an alternative choice based on the number of prosthetic complications and maintenance events. This was also confirmed by the comparable clinical data between standard implants and mini-implants.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2022 dental literature to briefly touch on several topics of interest to modern restorative dentistry. Each committee member brings discipline-specific expertise in their subject areas that include (in order of the appearance in this report): prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence the daily dental treatment decisions of the reader with an emphasis on innovations, new materials and processes, and future trends in dentistry. With the tremendous volume of literature published daily in dentistry and related disciplines, this review cannot be comprehensive. Instead, its purpose is to update interested readers and provide valuable resource material for those willing to subsequently pursue greater detail on their own. Our intent remains to assist colleagues in navigating the tremendous volume of newly minted information produced annually. Finally, we hope that readers find this work helpful in managing patients.

Immediate versus conventional loading of mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

There is a scarcity of randomized clinical trials (RCT) that report medium- and long-term results and a lack of consensus in the literature on the predictability of immediately loaded unsplinted narrow diameter implants supporting mandibular overdentures. This RCT compared the performance of conventional (CL) and immediate loading (IL) of mandibular overdentures retained by two narrow-diameter implants for 3 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients from an RCT treated with CL or IL were invited to attend to 2- and 3-year follow-ups. Clinical, radiographic, functional, and oral health-related quality of life parameters were evaluated. Prosthetic maintenance events, biological complications, and success and survival rates were also recorded. The data were tested by multilevel mixed-effects linear regression analysis and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

The 1-year survival rates of 90% in the CL group and 85% in the IL group were maintained as no implants were lost between 1 and 3 years. The marginal bone loss (MBL) in the IL group was significantly lower after year 3 (-0.04; p < 0.01). Significant changes were found only for the intra-group comparisons in the third year of function: (i) CL and IL presented similar progression of implant stability, MBL, and posterior bone area resorption; (ii) while CL started deteriorating of masticatory function, IL still exhibited functional evolution and (iii) oral comfort domain in the CL and pain domain in the IL were improved.

CONCLUSION

Although IL experienced the lowest MBL after 3 years, the outcomes showed that both loading protocols result in predictable medium-term rehabilitation when monitored annually.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

It can be expected that in the third year of function, patients with immediate loading may present more complaints related to general performance even with acceptable masticatory function and self-reported improvements in oral comfort.

Effect of Different Occlusal Tooth Forms of Mandibular Overdenture Retained by an Immediate Loaded Single Implant on the Masticatory Efficiency and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life

Aim

To study the masticatory efficacy and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of participants wearing a mandibular overdenture retained by an immediate loading single implant with different occlusal tooth forms.

Materials and Methods

For this nonrandomized controlled trial study, 27 edentulous participants were selected and randomly divided into three groups (n = 9) based on occlusal tooth forms of the mandibular implant overdenture (MIOD). Group I: participants received an MIOD with an anatomical tooth form; Group II: participants received an MIOD with a semianatomical tooth form; and Group III: participants received an MIOD with a nonanatomical tooth form. For each participant, a single implant (screw root form) was inserted into the midline of the mandibular ridge to support the MIOD. For each group, the masticatory efficiency was evaluated after 3 months, and the OHRQoL of the participants was evaluated after 3 and 6 months. One-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's test were used for data analysis (P < 0.05).

Results

The masticatory efficiency of the anatomic and semianatomic tooth forms was higher than that of the nonanatomic (P < 0.05). Moreover, the improvement in the participants' OHRQoL in the anatomic group was more significant than that of other groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

There was a greater improvement in masticatory efficiency and participants' OHRQoL when fitted with an anatomic tooth form mandibular overdenture retained by an immediate loading single implant than with a semianatomic or nonanatomic tooth form.

Biomechanical Analysis of Palateless Splinted and Unsplinted Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

The objective of this study was to compare the distribution of stress in the maxillary bone, dental implants, and prosthetic components supporting implant-supported maxillary overdentures with partial palatal coverage, in both splinted and unsplinted designs. Two models of maxillary overdentures were designed using the Exocad Dental CAD program, which included cancellous and cortical bone. The complete denture design and abutments (locator abutments in the unsplinted and Hader bar with Vertix attachments placed distally in the splinted variant) were also designed. The denture material was PEEK (Polyetheretherketone), and the method used to analyze patient-specific 3D X-ray scans was 3D QCT/FEA (three-dimensional quantitative computed tomography-based finite element analysis). Loading was divided into three load cases, in the frontal region (both incisors of the denture) and distal region (both molars and first premolar of the denture). The forces applied were 150 N with an oblique component with a buccal inclination of 35° in the frontal region, and 600 N with a buccal inclination of 5° (molars) or solely vertical (premolar) in the distal region. The model with locator abutments showed higher stresses in all load cases in both analyzed implant variants and in the maxilla. The differences in stress distribution between the splinted and unsplinted variants were more significant in the distal region. According to the results of the present study, the amount of stress in bone tissue and dental implant parts was smaller in the splinted, bar-retained variant. The findings of this study can be useful in selecting the appropriate prosthetic design for implant-supported maxillary overdentures with partial palatal coverage.

Methodological quality of network meta-analysis in dentistry: a meta-research

This meta-research aimed to provide an overview of the methodological quality and risk of bias of network meta-analyses (NMA) in dentistry. Searches for NMA of randomized clinical trials with clinical outcomes in dentistry were performed in databases up to January 2022. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts, selected full texts, and extracted the data. The adherence to PRISMA-NMA reporting guideline, the AMSTAR-2 methodological quality tool, and the ROBIS risk of bias tool were assessed in the studies. Correlation between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results was also investigated. Sixty-two NMA studies were included and presented varied methodological quality. According to AMSTAR-2, half of the NMA presented moderate quality (n = 32; 51.6%). The adherence to PRISMA-NMA also varied. Only 36 studies (58.1%) prospectively registered the protocol. Other issues lacking of reporting were data related were data related to the NMA geometry and the assessment of results consistency, and the evaluation of risk of bias across the studies. ROBIS assessment showed a high risk of bias mainly for domains 1 (study eligibility criteria) and 2 (identification and selection of studies). Correlation coefficients between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results showed moderate correlation (rho < 0.6). Overall, NMA studies in dentistry were of moderate quality and at high risk of bias in several domains, especially study selection. Future reviews should be better planned and conducted and have higher compliance with reporting and quality assessment tools.

Early Loading of Two Implants Supporting Mandibular Overdentures in Geriatric Edentulous Patients: A 12-Year Follow-Up Study

Background: This study aims to show the clinical outcomes of implants supporting mandibular overdentures in edentulous patients. Methods: Mandibular edentulous patients were diagnosed with an oral examination, panoramic radiograph, and diagnostic casts for intermaxillary relations and treated with overdentures over two implants. After two-stage surgery, implants were early loaded with an overdenture at 6 weeks. Results: Fifty-four patients (28 females and 24 males) were treated with 108 implants. Thirty-two patients (59.2%) had a previous history of periodontitis. Twenty-three patients (46%) were smokers. Forty patients (74.1%) suffered from systemic diseases (i.e., diabetes, cardiovascular diseases). The clinical follow-up of the study was 147.8 ± 10.4 months. The clinical outcomes showed a global success of 94.5% of implants. Fifty-four overdentures were placed in the patients over the implants. The mean marginal bone loss was 1.12 ± 0.34 mm. Nineteen patients (35.2%) showed some kind of mechanical prosthodontic complication. Sixteen implants (14.8%) were associated with peri-implantitis. Conclusions: Based on the clinical results obtained, we can determine that the treatment of elderly edentulous patients with mandibular overdentures through the early loading of two placed implants is a successful implant protocol.

Facial biotype classification for orthodontic treatment planning using an alternative learning algorithm for tree augmented Naive Bayes

BACKGROUND

When designing a treatment in orthodontics, especially for children and teenagers, it is crucial to be aware of the changes that occur throughout facial growth because the rate and direction of growth can greatly affect the necessity of using different treatment mechanics. This paper presents a Bayesian network approach for facial biotype classification to classify patients' biotypes into Dolichofacial (long and narrow face), Brachyfacial (short and wide face), and an intermediate kind called Mesofacial, we develop a novel learning technique for tree augmented Naive Bayes (TAN) for this purpose.

RESULTS

The proposed method, on average, outperformed all the other models based on accuracy, precision, recall, [Formula: see text], and kappa, for the particular dataset analyzed. Moreover, the proposed method presented the lowest dispersion, making this model more stable and robust against different runs.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed method obtained high accuracy values compared to other competitive classifiers. When analyzing a resulting Bayesian network, many of the interactions shown in the network had an orthodontic interpretation. For orthodontists, the Bayesian network classifier can be a helpful decision-making tool.

Treatment outcomes of implant-assisted removable partial denture with distal extension based on the Kennedy classification and attachment type: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) have recently become popular, but little information is available on the treatment outcomes based on the Kennedy classification and attachment types.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the treatment outcomes of IARPD delivered for distal extension edentulous areas based on the differences in the Kennedy classification and attachment type.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

English-language clinical studies on IARPD published between January 1980 and February 2020 were collected from MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library (via the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Scopus online database, and manual searching. Two reviewers selected the articles based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria, followed by data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were selected after evaluating the titles and abstracts of 2410 papers. Nineteen studies were finally included after the perusal of the full text. Fourteen studies focused on Class I, 4 studies investigated both Class I and II, and only 1 study was conducted on Kennedy's class II. Eight types of attachments were reported. The ball attachment was the most frequently used attachment, which was employed in 8 of the included studies. The implant survival rate ranged from 91 to 100%. The reported marginal bone loss ranged from 0.3 mm to 2.30 mm. The patient satisfaction was higher with IARPD than with conventional RPDs or that before treatment. The results of prosthetic complications were heterogeneous and inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

IARPD exhibited favorable clinical outcomes when used as a replacement for distal extension edentulous areas. The comparison between the clinical outcomes of Kennedy's class I and II was inconclusive owing to the lack of studies focusing on Kennedy Class II alone. The stud attachment was the most commonly used type in IARPDs. Overall, the different attachment systems did not influence the implant survival rate and patient satisfaction. Further high-quality studies are needed to investigate the attachment systems used in IARPD.

Effects of attachment type and number of dental implants supporting mandibular overdenture on peri-implant health: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of overdenture (OD) attachment type and the number of implants supporting mandibular ODs on peri-implant health.

STUDY SELECTION

From inception to October 2020, electronic databases (Medline/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) were systematically searched. The outcomes of interest were marginal bone loss (MBL), pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index, bleeding index, and implant survival rate. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the GeMTC package supported by R. The weighted mean difference and 95% credible interval were estimated.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies with a total of 1166 participants who received 2666 dental implants were included. Except for 4 bar and 4 telescopic, which showed a statistically lower MBL than the 2 locator, all other interventions showed insignificant differences in MBL (P > 0.05). The difference in periodontal probing depth was not statistically significant when comparing the different groups. The pooled implant survival rates of the different interventions ranged from 88.9% to 100%. The rank probability test showed that 4 bar and 4 telescopic had the lowest MBL, 2 magnet and 2 bar had the highest PI, whereas 4 locator showed the least PPD.

CONCLUSIONS

Except for 4 implants+bar, or telescopic, and 4 locator that, respectively, showed less MBL and PPD compared to some interventions, it seemed that different attachment types and number of implants supporting mandibular ODs have no clear superiority over the other in terms of peri-implant health outcomes.

Biomechanical Aspects of Various Attachments for Implant Overdentures: A Review

There have been considerable recent technological developments for implant overdenture attachments. This study presents an overview of the biomechanical and biomolecular aspects of various attachments for implant overdenture. Available articles on attachments for implant overdenture were reviewed from January 1980 to August 2021 in the ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science resources, and relevant studies were included in this study. We focused on the following topics: attachment systems, retention of various attachments, stress distribution with different attachments, the design and fabrication of attachments, digital techniques in overdenture attachments, and the effects of attachments in peri-implant health. We found that plastic resin is commonly used for ball and bar attachments, whereas nylon resin is commonly used in locator attachments. The locator system offers a valuable attachment option for implant-retained overdenture. Attachment retention reduces while lateral force increases with implant inclination in overdenture. The higher the retention of an overdenture attachment, the higher the transferred stresses. Additionally, clip loading produces more stress in implants and precision elements than bar-retained dentures. As such, we conclude that the ball and locator systems the best overdenture systems due to their superior tissue response, survival rate, and patient satisfaction.

Biomechanical Aspects of Various Attachments for Implant Overdentures: A Review

There have been considerable recent technological developments for implant overdenture attachments. This study presents an overview of the biomechanical and biomolecular aspects of various attachments for implant overdenture. Available articles on attachments for implant overdenture were reviewed from January 1980 to August 2021 in the ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science resources, and relevant studies were included in this study. We focused on the following topics: attachment systems, retention of various attachments, stress distribution with different attachments, the design and fabrication of attachments, digital techniques in overdenture attachments, and the effects of attachments in peri-implant health. We found that plastic resin is commonly used for ball and bar attachments, whereas nylon resin is commonly used in locator attachments. The locator system offers a valuable attachment option for implant-retained overdenture. Attachment retention reduces while lateral force increases with implant inclination in overdenture. The higher the retention of an overdenture attachment, the higher the transferred stresses. Additionally, clip loading produces more stress in implants and precision elements than bar-retained dentures. As such, we conclude that the ball and locator systems the best overdenture systems due to their superior tissue response, survival rate, and patient satisfaction.