One-year prospective study on single short (7-mm) implant overdentures in patients with severely resorbed mandibles

Treatment effect of implant-supported fixed complete dentures and implant overdentures on patient-reported outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported fixed complete dentures (IFCDs) or implant overdentures (IODs) on dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In January 2022, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were screened for prospective clinical studies on completely edentulous patients treated with IFCDs and/or IODs, reporting pre-treatment and follow-up dPROs. Hedges' g effect sizes (ES) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Afterward, meta-analyses were conducted using random effect models.

RESULTS

A total number of 1608 records was initially identified. Of those, 28 studies reporting dPROs from 1457 patients were finally included. The applied dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) included several versions of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) or specific items assessing satisfaction with Visual Analogue Scales (VAS). The overall ES was large for rehabilitation with IFCDs (1.68 [CI: 1.15, 2.20]) and IODs (1.26 [CI: 0.99, 1.52]) with no significant difference (p = .165) between the two. Denture stability was the only factor rated significantly higher for IFCDs (ES difference: 2.37 [CI: 0.21, 4.54]; p = .032). Subgroup analyses revealed moderately higher ES for IODs on two implants relative to one implant (ES difference: 0.73 [CI: 0.34, 1.12]; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong positive effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients, independent of the type of prosthetic rehabilitation. In patients seeking high stability, IFCDs may be preferable. In mandibular IODs on a single implant, there was a significantly positive effect of an additional implant on dPROs.

The Single Midline Implant in the Edentulous Mandible-Current Status of Clinical Trials

The single midline implant in the edentulous mandible is a treatment concept that has often been controversially discussed. Nearly 30 years ago, the first available clinical results revealed high implant survival rates and remarkable improvements in oral comfort, function, patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life for edentulous patients compared to the situation with no implant. However, the clinical trials were predominantly conducted with a small number of patients over a short to medium follow-up period. Today, numerous clinical investigations on the single midline implant in the edentulous mandible, which increasingly include longer-term observation periods, are available. It is the aim of this overview to present the current literature and to highlight the clinical problems. This article is a 2023 update of a review published by the authors in the German language in 2021 in the German journal Implantologie. In total, 19 prospective clinical trials with a follow-up period of 0.5-10 years were analyzed. Over this observation period, single implants with modern rough implant surfaces in the edentulous mandible reveal high implant survival rates of between 90.9 and 100% when a conventional delayed loading protocol was applied.

Impact of the extension of the anterior-posterior spread on quality of life and satisfaction of patients treated with implant-retained mandibular overdentures - a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the degree of satisfaction (SD) and the impact on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of edentulous patients treated with conventional complete dentures (CCDs) and mandibular overdentures (IODs) with a short anteroposterior spread (S-APS) or a large antero-posterior spread (L-APS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Edentulous patients were treated with CCDs and subsequently randomly allocated to receive a bar clip mandibular overdenture retained by 2 interforaminal implants (Control) or 4 (Test: 2 additional implants distal to the mental foramen). The Oral Health Impact Profile Edent questionnaire (OHIP-20E) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were applied at a mean follow-up of 38.5 months to assess the impact on OHRQoL and DS, respectively. Comparisons between the type of prosthesis and the extension of the AP spread were made with Student's t test for paired samples and for independent samples, respectively, at a significance level of 5%.

RESULTS

The IODs had significantly lower OHRQoL values ​​in the dimensions "functional limitation" (p=0.03), "physical pain" (p=0.02), "psychological discomfort" (p<0.01), "disability physical" (p<0.01) and "general score" (p<0.01) (n=20 patients). The IODs presented DS values ​​significantly for "aesthetics" (p=0.04), "stability" (p=0.03), "masticatory capacity" (p<0.01), "function" (p<0.01) and "oral condition" (p=0.03). The S-APS group (control) resulted in significantly lower values ​​in the dimensions "physical pain" (p<0.01) and "general score" (p<0.01) and no domain with statistical difference in the VAS scale.

CONCLUSIONS

IODs significantly improved OHRQoL and DS. The increase in AP spread did not result in benefits for the patient's OHRQOL and DS in this clinical study. (Study Protocol Number: 1.452.492) CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Implantology has experienced in the last 20 years a permanent evolution that aim at increasing predictability and improving long-term clinical performance. Placement of short implants distally to the mental foramen, for instance, and the resulting increase of the anterior-posterior spread, is a promising approach and is worthy of investigation.