Clinical Evaluation of Implant-Supported Removable Partial Dentures With a Stress-Breaking Attachment

Effect of surgical and prosthodontic protocols of distal extension implant-supported removable partial dentures on clinical and patient-reported outcomes: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Standard surgical and prosthodontic protocols for managing partially dentate patients with implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients provided with ISRPDs in distal edentulous arches based on different surgical and prosthodontic protocols.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic and manual literature search was conducted in 3 databases, PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library, for clinical studies on distal extension ISRPDs related to clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Kennedy Class I and II arches described in articles published from January 2000 to December 2023 were included. Clinical parameters regarding implant type, location, loading protocols, and implant survival rate and PROMs including masticatory performance, esthetics, and overall satisfaction were compared. The risk of bias was determined by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 (RoB 2.0).

RESULTS

An initial total of 103 studies were identified, but only 11 articles were selected after implementing the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ten studies evaluated PROMs, and 6 studies evaluated clinical outcomes (5 studies evaluated both). The implant survival rate ranged from 91.7% to 100%, with no clear differentiation among the studies with immediate or delayed loading protocols. Most studies described implants positioned in the molar region. In general, patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) improved significantly with ISRPDs compared with conventional removable partial dentures (RPDs) or RPDs with healing abutments. Posttreatment clinical outcomes revealed stable peri-implant health with no significant bone loss or prosthetic complications. No specific implant configuration, including implant type and location or attachment system, appeared to be better than another. Ball attachments were the commonly used attachments. Two studies were of high risk and 3 studies of low risk. The remaining 6 studies were judged to have some concerns based on the RoB 2.0 analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing an ISRPD improved patient satisfaction, OHRQoL, and the clinical outcomes in distal extension situations, with most studies positioning the implants in the molar region. The type of attachment did not significantly affect the outcomes, although ball attachments were the most used attachment in ISRPDs.

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures: Part I. a scoping review of clinical applications

PURPOSE

This scoping review aimed to systematically map research regarding implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs), and identify existing gaps in knowledge.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently conducted a search of the MEDLINE-PubMed and Scopus databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Review and included articles published in English up to August 31, 2022, including human studies, reviews, and in vitro studies. Expert opinions, animal studies, and clinical studies involving complete overdentures were excluded, and ten aspects for establishing the treatment strategy for IARPDs were examined.

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve articles were chosen. There were two treatment modalities: IARPDs retained by implant- and tooth-supported surveyed single crowns (SCs) or fixed partial dentures (FPDs). In IARPDs retained by tooth-supported surveyed SCs or FPDs, the survival rate of dental implants for IARPDs was relatively higher with a wide range of marginal bone loss and many complications, but with improved functional performance, oral health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction. There were limited data on survival or success rates and designs of IARPDs, attachment selections, length and diameter, inclination, placement sites, and loading protocols of implants, regardless of prosthetic types. There was limited information on maxillary IARPDs except for survival rates of implants.

CONCLUSIONS

Although IARPDs could become a useful treatment strategy, there is limited scientific consensus with gaps in knowledge about their use. Additional well-designed clinical and in vitro studies are necessary to scientifically establish IARPDs as definitive prostheses in implant dentistry.

Oral function of implant-assisted removable partial dentures with magnetic attachments using short implants: A prospective study

OBJECTIVES

This prospective study aimed to compare the oral functions of removable partial dentures (RPDs) with those of implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) with short implants and magnetic attachments in patients with mandibular Kennedy class I and II.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty participants with mandibular Kennedy class I or II and at least three distal missing teeth were recruited. Oral functions, including mixing ability, comminuting ability, maximum bite force, and occlusal contact area, were assessed for RPDs (stage 0), IARPDs with healing caps (stage 1), and IARPDs with magnetic attachments (stage 2). The implants were loaded with occlusal force in stages 1 and 2. Finally, the data of the 27 participants who completed the evaluation at stage 2 were analyzed. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction was used to assess the differences in the oral functions among the different stages.

RESULTS

The implant survival rate was 93.8%. There were significant differences in the comminuting ability and occlusal contact area between stages 0 and 2 (p < .001 and p = .036, respectively) and stages 1 and 2 (p = .003 and p = .015, respectively). Regarding the maximum bite force, there was a significant difference between stages 1 and 2 (p = .018). However, there was no significant difference in the mixing ability between the three stages.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that IARPDs in the mandible with short implants and magnetic attachments may improve oral functions.

Converting Bilateral Free-End Removable Partial Dentures to Implant-Assisted Removable Partial Dentures Using 6 mm Short Implants: Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Prospective Clinical Study

The study assessed oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients who received two 6 mm short implants in mandibular molar sites, converting existing bilateral free-end removable partial dentures (RPDs) to implant-assisted RPDs (IARPDs). After a postsurgical healing period of 4 months, the participants received a non-retentive dome abutment for 8 weeks, and then a retentive ball abutment for another 8 weeks. Afterwards, the participants made their final choice on which abutment to keep. The final follow-up was 1 year after implant placement. OHRQoL was evaluated with the 49-items version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) at the abutment exchanges and the final follow-up. Furthermore, numerical rating scales were used to analyze patient satisfaction after 1 year. Questionnaire data of 13 participants were evaluated. Overall, OHRQoL increased with both the dome (p = 0.02) and the ball abutments (p < 0.001), without a significant difference between the abutments (p = 0.953). The questionnaires revealed an improvement in terms of oral situation, quality of life, and masticatory capacity (all p < 0.01). Patients showed a significant preference for the ball abutments (p < 0.001). Converting RPDs to IARPDs resulted in significant improvement of OHRQoL. Patients seem to prefer retentive over non-retentive abutments, although no differences in terms of OHRQoL were observed.

Implant-supported removable partial dentures compared to conventional dentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) with distal extension removable partial dentures (DERPDs) in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs: patients' quality of life and satisfaction) and to determine mechanical and biological complications associated with ISRPDs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed on four databases to identify studies treating Kennedy class I or II edentulous patients and which compared ISRPDs with DERPDs in terms of PROMS and studies, which evaluated mechanical and biological complications associated ISRPDs. Two authors independently extracted data on quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications from these studies. The risk of bias was assessed for each study, and for PROMs, the authors performed a meta-analysis by using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles were included based on the selection criteria. The difference in mean scores for quality of life (30.5 ± 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.9-36.1) and patient satisfaction (-20.8 ± 0.2; 95% CI, -23.7 to -17.8) between treatments with conventional and implant-supported removable dentures was statistically significant (p < .05). Implant-supported removable dentures improved patients' overall quality of life and satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications, such as clasp adjustment, abutment or implant loosening, marginal bone resorption, and peri-implant mucositis, were noted in ISRPDs during patient follow-up. Studies assessing PROMs were very heterogeneous (I2  = 65%, p = .85; I2  = 75%, p = .88).

CONCLUSIONS

ISRPDs significantly improved quality of life and patient satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications have been associated with ISRPDs treatment, requiring regular monitoring of patients to avoid the occurrence of these complications.

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.

Stability of masticatory movements after placement of implant-supported denture

The purpose of this study was to clarify the stability of masticatory movement after placement of implant-supported denture. Fourteen patients (patient group) with mandibular implants denture and maxillary complete denture and 30 dentate adults (control group) were asked to chew a boiled fishpaste, and the masticatory movement was recorded using MKG. For the 10 cycles beginning with the 5th cycle of mastication, the parameters representing the stability of masticatory movement were calculated. Data collected at 1, 3, 6, 9 months and 1, 2, 3 years after insertion of implants denture were compared between sessions and also between the patient and control groups. The mean and standard deviation of the values in the patient group at 1 month after insertion of implants denture were large, but gradually decreased 6 to 9 months after insertion of implants denture. Each parameter maintained almost the same value from 1 to 3 years. The parameter values of the patient group were significantly larger than those of control group from 1 to 9 months after insertion of implants denture, but 1 year after insertion of implants denture, there was no significant difference between the two groups in 5 out of 7 parameters. From these results, it was suggested that a certain duration, about 9 months to 1 year, was necessary for patients with implants denture to adapt to the new masticatory function and that the timing of functional evaluation should be set to 1 year after insertion of implants denture.

Short strategic implants for mandibular removable partial dentures: One-year results from a pilot randomized crossover abutment type study

Objectives

The present pilot study analyzed two abutment types (a retentive ball and a non‐retentive dome) in implant‐assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) on 6 mm short implants with respect to clinical, radiological, and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs), during the first year.

Materials and Methods

Two implants were placed bilaterally in mandibular molar sites, converting existing free‐end removable partial dentures (RPDs) to IARPDs. Twelve subjects were randomized to initially receive either the dome (Group A, n = 6) or the ball abutment (Group B, n = 6). After eight weeks, the abutments were exchanged. After another 8 weeks, the participants were given the choice of one of the abutments. Mean values and standard deviations (SD) were calculated, and random‐effect linear regression analyses were applied to analyze marginal bone level alterations and PROs (α < .05).

Results

Twelve participants were included in the study; however, one dropout occurred. Patient ratings increased significantly in both study groups. The majority of the participants (82%) ultimately chose the ball abutment. The implant survival rate was 100%, and the success rate was 90.9% twelve months after implant placement (mean peri‐implant bone‐loss: −1.2; SD: 0.6 mm) without a statistically significant difference between the study groups, in terms of clinical‐ and radiological outcomes.

Conclusion

Placing 6 mm short implants at mandibular molar sites of RPD wearers seems to be a viable treatment option, based on this investigation with a short‐term follow‐up. Although only minor differences between the two abutments were observed, patients seem to prefer the ball over the dome abutment.

Effect of the attachments on clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension implant-supported removable partial dentures: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Healing abutments and attachments have been used for implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs). However, the effects of these abutments and attachments on the clinical outcomes of the implants and prostheses are elusive because of the lack of standardized research protocols.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments and attachments by analyzing qualified studies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic and manual literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases including articles published in English from 1980 to 2020. Publications of clinical outcome studies on the mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments or attachments were screened by inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical outcomes of removable partial dentures (RPDs) and ISRPDs with different types of abutments or attachments were compared by using patient-reported outcome measures, implant survival rate, masticatory performance, and implant- or prosthesis-related complications. Study designs and clinical outcome data were extracted and analyzed. The evidence of the selected studies and degree of recommendation were made according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, and the risk of bias of the studies was assessed based on Newcastle-Ottawa criteria.

RESULTS

Of 541 articles initially identified after removing duplicate records, 11 articles were selected by applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, by inter-viewer agreement, and by hand searching. Nine prospective cohort studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, and 1 randomized controlled trial were included with evidence levels assessed at 1b, 2b, and 2c. The risk of bias varied from 5 to 8 out of 9. Patient overall satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) scores, and masticatory ability were significantly improved for ISRPDs with either healing abutments, ball, or LOCATOR attachments when compared with RPDs. The implant survival rate varied from 92% to 97% at 2 to 10 years for ball attachment and was 100% at 1 year for LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs. Marginal bone loss (MBL) varied from 0 to 1 mm in all studies, although LOCATOR attachments had significantly less MBL compared with ball attachments. The maximal pocket depth and bleeding on probing index around implants at 1 year were 1.7 to 1.8 mm and 0.1 to 0.3. Loose healing caps were the main mechanical complication of implants. There were more prosthetic complications in ISRPDs with ball attachments than RPDs at 10-year follow-up, including gold matrix loosening, loss of retention, and denture base fractures. No direct comparisons were made of patient-reported outcomes or prosthetic complications between ball and LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Healing abutments and attachments (ball or LOCATOR) improved patient-reported outcomes and the masticatory function of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. However, insufficient evidence was found to determine the relative effectiveness of different attachment systems on the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. Abutment loosening was the most frequent mechanical complication for healing abutments. More prosthetic complications were associated with ball attachment-supported ISRPDs than RPDs. The major weaknesses of this systematic review were the relatively moderate level of evidence and the publication language, since implant attachments are used in many non-English speaking countries.

Patient-reported outcomes of implant-assisted removable partial dentures with magnetic attachments using short implants: A prospective study

PURPOSE

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) with short implants improve the oral functions of removable partial dentures (RPDs). This study aimed to compare the patient-reported outcomes of RPDs and IARPDs with short implants retained by magnetic attachments.

METHODS

We recruited 30 participants with mandibular Kennedy Class I or II and distal extension defects of three or more teeth. RPDs, IARPDs with a healing cap, and IARPDs with a magnetic attachment were evaluated across stages using patient-reported outcomes. All participants completed questionnaires (oral health-related quality of life [OHRQoL], patient general satisfaction, and patient's denture assessment [PDA]) at each stage. The OHRQoL was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile-J 54 (OHIP-J 54) score. The general patient satisfaction was evaluated using a 100 mm visual analog scale. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction were used to evaluate differences between the groups (α=0.05).

RESULTS

The OHRQoL of IARPDs was significantly higher than that of RPDs. IARPDs with a magnetic attachment had significantly better patient general satisfaction and PDA than IARPDs with a healing cap.

CONCLUSIONS

The OHRQoL, patient general satisfaction, and PDA were improved by IARPD with a short implant using a magnetic attachment.

In Vitro Assessment of the Effect of Implant Position on Biomechanical Behaviors of Implant-Supported Removable Partial Dentures in Kennedy Class II Condition

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of implant position and loading position on biomechanical behaviors using implant-supported removable partial denture (ISRPD) models in a simulated Kennedy class Ⅱ partially edentulous mandible. Three types of Kennedy class Ⅱ mandibular acrylic resin models (a conventional RPD without support by an implant—CRPD; models with an implant placed at first molar (#46)—MP-ISRPD— and second molar (#47)—DP-ISRPD) were used to measure vertical displacement of the RPD, mesio-distal displacement of the abutment tooth, and bending moment of the abutment tooth and implant under one-point loading. The variables at three respective loading points (#45, #46 and #47) were compared statistically. Vertical displacement was suppressed in ISRPDs compared to the CRPD, and significant effects were identified under loading at the implant position. The largest meiso-distal displacement was observed in MP-ISRPD under #47 loading. Bending moments of the abutment tooth and implant were significantly higher in MP-ISRPD than in DP-ISPRD. In MP-ISRPD, a higher bending moment of the abutment tooth under #45 and #47 loading was detected, although the bending moment in DP-ISRPD was almost zero. The results of this study suggested that MP-ISRPD shows the specific biomechanical behaviors, although DP-ISRPD might provide biomechanical benefits under all one-point loading conditions.