Single unit attachments improve peri-implant soft tissue conditions in mandibular overdentures supported by four implants

Efficacy of laser biostimulation for mandibular narrow ridges treated with one-stage ridge splitting and two-implant overdentures: A one-year preliminary study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The management of patients with narrow-mandibular ridges who seek prosthetic rehabilitation is challenging.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this one-year preliminary clinical study was to compare the effects of laser biostimulation and a placebo on peri-implant tissues for a 2-implant-retained mandibular polyetheretherketone (PEEK) overdenture on expanded narrow mandibular ridges.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighteen completely edentulous participants were enrolled for mandibular ridge splitting in the canine regions, followed by expansion, the placement of implants, and the application of a bone graft. In the test group, laser therapy was applied labially and lingually at the surgical sites, while a placebo laser was used in the control group. PEEK overdentures retained by LOCATOR attachments were provided after 6 months. Clinical evaluations were performed using probing depth, plaque, bleeding, and gingival indices at insertion and 3, 6, and 12 months after insertion. Vertical bone loss (VBL) was evaluated with periapical radiograph at insertion and 6 and 12 months later. The Mann-Whitney test was used to test the difference between the 2 different groups at each evaluation time (α=.05). The Friedman-test was used, followed by Wilcoxon signed rank test, to test the change over time in the same group, and the Bonferroni adjusted significance level was used for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Some clinical and radiographic parameters significantly increased with time in both groups (P<.001). Significant differences between the 2 groups were revealed in bleeding scores at 3 months (P=.006) and 6 months (P=.018). Also, significant differences between the 2 groups were observed in gingival scores at 3 months (P=.002), 6 months (P=.015), and 12 months (P=.019) after overdenture insertion in favor of the laser group. Peri-implant VBL was significantly higher in the non-laser group at 6 months (P=.015), and 12 months (P=.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this clinical study, respecting the small sample size and the short follow-up period, laser bio-stimulation after 1-stage ridge splitting in narrow mandibular ridges enhanced the soft and hard peri implant tissues when used with LOCATOR attachments and PEEK overdentures.

Single Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: A Literature Review

The absence of teeth, known as edentulism, poses considerable obstacles in prosthodontic care and greatly affects a person's well-being. Conventional complete dentures frequently lead to problems like instability and insufficient retention, especially in the lower jaw. Fortunately, the introduction of dental implants has transformed the way we approach edentulous patients, as they now offer support and enhanced retention for removable prostheses, thus revolutionizing their treatment. While a consensus exists on using two implants for retaining mandibular overdentures, the associated cost may be prohibitive for economically disadvantaged individuals. As a solution, the concept of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures has emerged, catering to individuals with limited financial resources and complete tooth loss. This review explores the efficacy and suitability of the single implant overdenture approach, along with an overview of treatment options for edentulous patients, including traditional dentures, tooth-supported overdentures, and implant-supported overdentures. The preservation of bone, improvements in functional abilities, and psychological benefits associated with overdentures are discussed. Moreover, various classifications and prosthetic options for implant overdentures, specifically for mandibular cases, are presented. This literature review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of possible treatment options and focus on the single implant-retained mandibular overdenture approach and its implications in prosthodontic rehabilitation for edentulous patients.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical performance of implant-supported overdentures retained by CAD-CAM bars

Currently, there is no consensus on the indications and clinical performance of implant-supported overdentures (IODs) involving computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) bars.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of IODs involving CAD-CAM bars.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive search of studies published until May 2023 was conducted in many databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and SciELO, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question was: "How do IODs retained by bars fabricated by CAD-CAM technology perform in daily clinical practice?" The meta-analysis included clinical studies based on effect size and a two-tailed null test with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, nine reported a 100% implant survival rate for all CAD-CAM milled bars. Complications were reported in two studies with CAD/CAM-milled titanium bars, and one study reported more fractures in soldered gold bars used in maxillary rehabilitation. However, no fractures were observed in IODs retained by PEEK and zirconia bars. According to six studies, biological complications, including peri-implantitis, were minimal in the BioHPP and PEEK bar groups, while no cases were reported in the titanium or zirconia bar groups. CAD-CAM-milled zirconia bars had higher plaque and bleeding indices compared with titanium bars, as evidenced by findings from five studies. All four studies that evaluated Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) scores showed a positive effect of IODs retained by CAD-CAM milled titanium bars on quality of life. Patient satisfaction and acceptance by prosthodontists were significantly high, according to the results of five studies.

CONCLUSION

Overdentures retained with CAD-CAM milled titanium bars show great potential for use in daily clinical practice. Moreover, patient and practitioner satisfaction was very high when this method was used.

Maxillary implant overdentures retained with bars or solitary attachments: A 5-year randomised controlled trial

Purpose To compare the 5-year follow-up outcomes of maxillary overdentures retained by bars or solitary attachments.Methods Fifty consecutively selected fully edentulous patients experiencing problems with their conventional denture received four implants and were randomly allocated to receive a maxillary overdenture with either bar- or solitary attachment retention. Marginal bone level change (primary outcome), implant- and overdenture survival rate, clinical- and patient related outcome measures were recorded at baseline, and after 1 and 5 years. Biological and technical complications were recorded throughout the entire follow-up period.Results After 5 years, the mean marginal bone level change was higher in the solitary attachment group (-1.41±1.38mm, P=0.024) than in the bar group (-0.99±0.96mm). Also, fewer implants survived in the solitary attachment group (89.5%, P=0.027) than in the bar group (96.3%). The overdenture survival rate was 95.0% and 91.3% in the bar and solitary attachment group, respectively. Although the clinical and patient related outcomes were favourable and did not differ significantly between the groups, the peri-implantitis incidence was 25.8% in the solitary attachment group and 5.1% in the bar group. Any technical complications were minor.Conclusions In maxillary 4-implant overdenture therapy, the marginal bone level, implant survival rate and the number of complications are better with bar attachments than with solitary attachments. Both groups' clinical and patient related outcome measure scores were equal throughout the entire follow-up period.

Peri-implant tissue health and patient satisfaction of vertical versus inclined posterior implants used to support overdentures with bar attachments. A one-year randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate peri-implant tissue health and patient satisfaction of vertical and inclined posterior implants for mandibular bar overdentures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty edentulous participants received four implants in the interforaminal area of the mandible. The patients were randomly assigned into two equal groups; (1) vertical group (control): all implants were inserted vertically parallel to each other. Inclined group (study): the anterior implants were placed vertically, and the posterior implants were tilted 30° distally. Hader bar attachment with two 7 mm-distal cantilevers (vertical group) and without cantilevers (inclined group) was used to connect the implants to mandibular overdentures. Peri-implant tissue health (Plaque [PL] and gingival [GI] indices, pocket depth [PD], and crestal bone loss [CBL]) were evaluated after denture insertion (T0), 6 (T6), and 12 (T12) months after insertion. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analog scale after 12 months.

RESULTS

At T12, the vertical group showed significantly higher PL, PD, and CBL than the inclined group for anterior (p < 0.037) and posterior (p < 0.017) implants. The vertical group showed significantly higher GI than the inclined group for anterior implants (p = 0.003), and the inclined group showed significantly higher GI than the vertical group for posterior implants (p = 0.016). The inclined group showed significantly higher scores for general satisfaction (p = 0.049), prosthesis as a part of you (p = 0.013), appearance (p < 0.001), stability (p = 0.002), ease of cleaning (p < 0.001), and comfort (p = 0.001) than the vertical group.

CONCLUSION

Inclined posterior implants used to support mandibular bar overdentures are recommended than vertical implants, as it was associated with improved patient satisfaction and peri-implant tissue health.

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.

Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation of a Patient with Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report

Patients who have undergone maxillary resection procedures are rehabilitated with dental obturators or microvascular reconstruction. This case report describes implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient who underwent maxillary resection due to squamous cell carcinoma. After maxillectomy surgery, the patient was rehabilitated using a surgical obturator for one week followed by an interim obturator until the surgical field was completely healed. For definitive prosthesis, different treatment options were presented from which the patient selected an implant-supported maxillofacial prosthesis and a removable mandibular partial prosthesis. Under general anesthesia, two zygomatic implants and four conventional implants to the posterior maxilla were inserted. After a healing period, the bar-retained maxillofacial prosthesis and removable mandibular partial denture were fabricated. The patient was satisfied with regard to function, esthetics, speech, and swallowing. No problems, except slight discoloration of the prosthesis were noted at the 6-month follow-up. Implant-supported maxillofacial prostheses are a valuable treatment option to improve   quality of life after maxillary resection.

The Effectiveness of Waist-Shaped and Straight-Shaped Interdental Brushes in Cleaning Implant Overdenture Attachments: A Self-Controlled Clinical Trial

Elderly patients often find it challenging to remove plaque accumulated on the attachments of implant overdentures (IODs) using conventional cleaning instruments. Further, excessive plaque accumulation can lead to peri-implant diseases and occasionally to respiratory diseases. Therefore, here, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of waist-shaped interdental brushes (WIBs) with that of straight-shaped interdental brushes (SIBs) in plaque removal from the locator attachments of IODs. Twenty participants with 2 locator attachments retaining mandibular IODs participated in this study. After the baseline cleaning, the participants refrained from oral hygiene maintenance for 3 days. A dentist cleaned 1 of the attachments using the WIB and the other attachment using the SIB. The pre- and post-cleaning modified plaque index (mPLI) scores were recorded. After another 3 days free from oral hygiene maintenance, the trained participants repeated the same cleaning procedure using the WIB and SIB. Pre- and post-cleaning mPLI scores were recorded. Regardless of the type of brush used, the post-cleaning mPLI scores were lower than the pre-cleaning scores. After the cleaning procedure, the overall mean mPLI score was lower in the WIB group than in the SIB group. The post-cleaning mPLI scores at the line angles and on the axial surfaces of the attachments were also lower in the WIB group than in the SIB group. There was no difference in the cleaning effectiveness between the dentist and participants when they used the same type of interdental brush. The WIB was significantly more efficient in plaque removal than the SIB, especially at the line-angle sites.

Immediately loaded mini-implants supporting mandibular overdentures: A one-year comparative prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about differences between mini-implants and conventional immediately loaded implants for overdentures.

OBJECTIVES

To compare clinical outcomes using two immediately loaded conventional or mini-implants for mandibular overdentures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Edentulous patients receiving either conventional (4.1 mm) or mini-implants (2.9 mm or less), based on available bone width were analyzed. All implants were immediately loaded with mandibular overdentures installed using locator attachments. Digital periapical radiographs for measuring marginal bone loss and clinical outcomes (ie, periodontal probing, plaque, and bleeding indices) were assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12-month follow-up periods.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (25 receiving conventional implants-12 females, mean age of 65.3 ± 7.3 years; and 25 receiving mini-implants-11 females, mean age of 66.8 ± 8.1 years) was analyzed. Peak insertion torque (P = .001) and bone loss (P = .02), as well as change in plaque (P = .02) and bleeding (P = .04) indices at 12 months differed significantly between groups. Furthermore, linear regression revealed the height of the locator as a risk factor for bone loss (P = .038).

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings suggest that two mini-implants are significantly more susceptible to bone loss after immediate loading, for which the height of locator might be considered a risk factor.

Retrospective evaluation of marginal bone loss around implants in a mandibular locator-retained denture using panoramic radiographic images and finite element analysis: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

The follow-up of the peri-implant marginal bone loss is the most important criterion for the determination of implant success.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to measure marginal bone loss using panoramic radiographic images (PRI) of patients treated using a mandibular, two implant-supported, locator-retained denture and to evaluate the compatibility of these findings with those of the finite element analysis (FEA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PRI of patients who had a mandibular, two implant-supported, locator-retained denture were assessed, and the mesial and distal marginal bone loss of both right- and left-sided implants was measured. Mandibular and maxillary models, which have the features of bilateral balanced occlusion, were created. The surfaces of the generated models were converted in a computer-aided design model that could be transferred to the FEA software, and the forces were defined on contacts formed in maximum intercuspation, lateral, and protrusive movement position for bilateral balanced occlusion.

RESULTS

The bone loss in the mesial and distal regions at the right- and left-sided implants was not statistically significant. Higher stresses were formed on the vestibular side under protrusive movement, on the lingual side under maximum intercuspation, on the distolingual side under left unilateral biting, and on the mesiolingual side under right unilateral biting in the FEA.

CONCLUSION

According to FEA, peri-implant bone resorption may be higher in the buccal and palatal regions, implying that panoramic radiographs can be misleading in understanding the amount of peri-implant bone resorption.

Maxillary implant overdentures retained by use of bars or locator attachments: 1-year findings from a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Comparison of outcomes of maxillary implant overdentures retained by use of either locator attachments or bars in a 1-year randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Fifty edentulous participants received four maxillary implants. They were allocated to two groups (n = 25) differing in type of prosthetic attachment used to retain the maxillary prosthesis: either locator attachments or bars were applied. After one year, implant and overdenture survival was assessed. Peri-implant hygiene (Plaque-index, presence of calculus), soft tissue conditions (Gingiva-index, Sulcus Bleeding-index and pocket probing depth) and patient satisfaction (oral health impact profile (OHIP-49), denture complaints questionnaire and general satisfaction score (GSS)) were compared. The peri-implant bone level was estimated using intra-oral radiographs (student T-test).

RESULTS

Implant survival was 96.7% in the locator group and 97.9% in the bar group. No overdentures had to be remade. Patient satisfaction was significantly greater in the bar group when rated by OHIP-49 sum score and by GSS. When comparing the denture complaints questionnaire and the separate OHIP-49 item scores, no significant difference was found. There was not a significant difference in hygiene and soft tissue conditions. Marginal bone loss was estimated 0.58 ± 0.71 mm for locators and 0.31 ± 0.47 mm for bars.

CONCLUSIONS

Maxillary overdentures on four implants retained by bars or locators were compared. Bone loss was within an acceptable range for both groups after 1 year. However, less bone was lost in the bar group. Even though both treatment options improved patient satisfaction, bars seem to be particularly beneficial with regard to OHIP-49 sum score.

Comparison of Three Prosthodontic Treatment Modalities for Patients with Periodontally Compromised Anterior Mandibular Teeth: A 2-year follow-up study

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively assess self-perceived chewing function (CF) and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in geriatric patients after receiving three different treatment modalities in the mandible: removable partial denture (CD-RPD), complete denture (CDs), or complete overdenture supported by mini dental implants (CD-MDI). At baseline, all patients had mobile anterior teeth (1 mm or >) and missing posterior teeth in the mandible. Patients were completely edentulous in the maxilla. After treatment, patients were recalled at the 3-month and the 2-year post-treatment period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 176 patients participated (CD group, n=68; CD-RPD group, n=58; CD-MDI group, n=50). Self-reported CF was assessed using the Chewing Function questionnaire (CFQ), The OHRQoL was evaluated using the OHIP14 questionnaire, which the patients completed 1. before treatment, 2. three months after treatment, and 3. at the 2-year post-treatment stage.

RESULTS

The OHRQoL and the self-perceived CF significantly improved in all groups after treatment (p<0.01). The highest improvement of a CF was recorded in the CD-MDI group. The OHRQoL was significantly higher in the CD-MDI group in comparison to the CDs group after treatment (p<0.01). At the 2-year post-treatment stage, self-perceived CF significantly further improved in the CD-MDI group, while it worsened in the CD and the CD-RPD groups (p<0.01). The same pattern was recorded for the OHIP14 summary scores. The highest amount of denture repairs and adjustments was recorded in the CD-RPD group, although maintenance was also demanding in the CD-MDI group.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this study, rehabilitation with mandibular MDI retained overdenture can be considered as preferred treatment with the constant improvement of OHRQoL and a chewing function in comparison to mandibular CD or mandibular RPD option in patients with mobile anterior mandibular teeth.

[Oral hygiene maintenance of locator attachments implant overdentures in edentulous population: A longitudinal study]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the oral hygiene status of edentulous patients with locator attachments implant overdentures (IOD) and to analyze the relationship among daily hygiene behavior, oral hygiene status and peri-implant diseases.

METHODS

Edentulous patients who received IOD treatment with locator attachments from January 2012 to May 2016 were recruited. Clinical and radiographic examinations were conducted to assess the peri-implant tissue status. Modified plaque index (mPLI), sulcus bleeding index (SBI), gingival index (GI), and probing depth (PD) were recorded and peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL) was measured using paralleling projection technique. Patients' peri-implant oral hygiene maintainence habits were investigated. The correlation between peri-implant diseases and oral hygiene status and behaviors was analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (125 implants) with an average follow-up time of 22 months (6-54 months) were enrolled. The mean values of mPLI, SBI, and GI were 1.4±1.2, 0.8±0.7, and 0.7± 0.6, respectively. Average PD was (2.2±0.7) mm. Mesial and distal maginal bone resorptions were (1.1±1.1) mm and (0.9±0.9) mm, respectively. The prevalance of mucositis and peri-implantitis of the implants were 49.6% and 0. The prevelance of mucositis in the patients with poor oral hygiene (mPLI≥2) was 11.9 times as much as that of those with adequate oral hygiene (mPLI<1). The patients who performed oral hygiene procedure on attachments at least twice a day achieved much lower mPLI scores than those who cleaned less than twice a day.

CONCLUSION

Oral hygiene condition in the group of patients with implant overdentures was poor, and it contributed to increased risk of peri-implant mucositis. The prevelance of musositis of the paitients with poor oral hygiene was 11.9 times as much as that of those with proper oral hygiene. Patients wearing IOD should pay more attention to the hygiene of the attachments.

The use of dental implants, cast bars and sleeve overdentures in oral cancer patients

Surgical resection of an oral tumour (and the associated free flap reconstruction) can significantly alter the oral anatomy. The lack of sulcus depth, alveolar ridge, presence of a mobile flap and limited tongue movement can make it impossible for patients to control a removable prosthesis. To help this cohort of patients, dental implants can be invaluable. The Oral Rehabilitation Team at Central Manchester University Dental Hospital have used dental implants to rehabilitate oral cancer patients for over thirty years. After their resective surgery, a number of patients were dentally rehabilitated with a laboratory-made, precious metal-alloy bar supported by at least four dental implants. A metal-alloy under-sleeve retained overdenture was then provided to fit over the milled bar. The majority of the 50 patients in this case series had tumours in the anterior floor of the mouth. It was noted that 76% of the patients received a rim resection and were reconstructed with a fasciocutaneous, soft tissue free flap. Six percent of patients received a segmental resection and were reconstructed with either a fibular or deep circumflex iliac artery free flap. The dental implants and sleeve overdentures had a survival rate of 100%. None of the dentures lost retention, implying that the frictional grip between the overcasting and the milled bar was sufficient to appease the retention demands of this cohort. However, 10% of patients encountered complications. This would suggest a success (or complication free) rate of 90% for this cohort of 50 oncology patients. This would still imply that milled bars/sleeve overdentures carry a relatively low maintenance burden and may be a useful treatment option for oral cancer patients.

Implant retention systems for implant-retained overdentures

Implant retained overdentures are being increasingly utilised in both general and specialist practice to rehabilitate patients with missing teeth, particularly those that are edentate. This article aims to inform the reader of a variety of retention systems that are available to retain an implant overdenture and to understand how these systems work, their advantages and disadvantages and to outline some of the clinical and treatment planning considerations involved in selecting the most appropriate retention system for patients.

Survival and Complications of Single Dental Implants in the Edentulous Mandible Following Immediate or Delayed Loading: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

It was the aim of this 24-mo randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate whether the survival of a single median implant placed in the edentulous mandible to retain a complete denture is not compromised by immediate loading. Secondary outcomes were differences in prosthetic complications between the loading principles. Each of the 158 patients who received an implant was randomly assigned to the immediate loading group (n = 81) or the delayed loading group (n = 77). Recall visits were performed 1 mo after implant placement (for only the delayed loading group) and 1, 4, 12, and 24 mo after implant loading. Nine implants failed in the immediate loading group, all within the first 3 mo of implant loading, and 1 implant failed in the delayed loading group prior to loading. Noninferiority of implant survival of the immediate loading group, as compared with the delayed loading group, could not be shown (P = 0.81). Consistent with this result, a secondary analysis with Fisher exact test revealed that the observed difference in implant survival between the treatment groups was indeed statistically significant (P = 0.019). The most frequent prosthetic complications and maintenance interventions in the mandible were retention adjustments, denture fractures, pressure sores, and matrix exchanges. There was only 1 statistically significant difference between the groups regarding the parameter “fracture of the denture base in the ball attachment area” (P = 0.007). The results indicate that immediate loading of a single implant in the edentulous mandible reveals inferior survival than that of delayed loading and therefore should be considered only in exceptional cases (German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00003730).

Influence of Number of Implants and Attachment Type on Stress Distribution in Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures: Finite Element Analysis

AIM:

This study aimed to compare the stresses generated by using two or four root form dental implants supporting mandibular overdentures that were retained with ball and locator attachments.

METHODS:

Under ANSYS environment, four 3D finite element models were prepared. These models simulated complete overdentures supported by two or four implants with either ball or locator attachments as a connection mechanism. The models’ components were created by CAD/CAM package then were imported to ANSYS. Load of 100 N was applied at the right premolar/molar region vertically and at an oblique angle of 110° from lingual direction.

RESULTS:

Within the conditions of this research, in all cases, it was found that cortical and cancellous bone regions were the least to be stressed. Also, the ball attachment produced higher stresses.

CONCLUSION:

Caps deformation and stresses are negligible in cases of using locator attachment in comparison to ball attachments. This may indicate longer lifetime and less repair/maintenance operations in implant overdentures retained by locator attachments. Although the study revealed that bone was insensitive to a number of implants or attachment type, it may be recommended to use two implants in the canine region than using four, where the locator attachments were found to be better.

Mandibule rehabilitation after embolization of hemangioma with implant overdenture using existing endosseous implants: A clinical report

PATIENT

A fifty-year-old man received embolization for mandibular hemangioma two years ago, and the surgeon had placed four implants in his mandible and made a removable denture upon the implants. His denture however fractured repeatedly in the past years. After examination and communication with the patient, an implant-assisted overdenture incorporating bar attachment combined ERA attachment and Locator abutment was re-fabricated. A sixteen months follow-up showed acceptable outcome.

DISCUSSION

There are some guidelines on design of implant over-denture, the site of implant will affect the final result. The unfavorable bone structure of mandibular hemangioma restricts the number and the site of implant, modification of design is essential to improve the final result.

CONCLUSION

Multi-disciplinary cooperation should be established for extensive edentulous case. Overlay type prosthesis incorporating several types of attachments can be suitable for complex case because of acceptable results and easy maintenance.

Marginal bone resorption around immediate and delayed loaded implants supporting a locator-retained mandibular overdenture. A 1-year randomised controlled trial

The aim of this 1-year study was to evaluate and compare crestal bone loss and clinical outcomes of immediate and delayed loaded implants supporting mandibular overdentures with Locator attachments. In a randomised controlled clinical trial, 36 completely edentulous patients (mean age 59.6 years) who desired to improve the stability of their mandibular dentures were randomly assigned into two groups. Each patient received two implants in the canine area of the mandible after a minimal flap reflection. Implants were loaded by mandibular overdentures either 3 months (delayed loading group, G1) or the same day (immediate loading group, G2) after implant placement. Locator attachments were used to retain all overdentures to the implants. Peri-implant vertical (VBL) and horizontal (HBLO) bone losses and clinical parameters [plaque scores (PI), gingival scores (GI), probing depths (PD) and implant stability (ISQ)] were assessed at time of overdenture insertion (T0), 6 months (T6) and 12 months (T12) after overdenture insertion. After 12 months of overdenture insertion, two implants (5.5%) failed in G2. Vertical bone loss was significantly higher in G2 compared with G1, while HBLO demonstrated insignificant differences between groups. All clinical parameters (PI, GI, PD and ISQ) did not differ significantly between groups. Vertical bone loss was significantly correlated with PD and HBLO. Immediately loaded two implants supporting a Locator-retained mandibular overdenture are associated with more vertical bone resorption when compared to delayed loaded implants after 1 year. Clinical outcomes do not differ significantly between loading protocols.

Overdenture locator attachments for atrophic mandible

Implant-supported overdentures provide a good opportunity for dentists to improve oral health and quality-of-life of patients. Atrophic mandible poses a significant challenge to successful oral rehabilitation with dental implants. In this article, the fabrication of lower overdenture by two narrow platform implants is described with dual retentive, resilient, self-locating locator attachment system. The locator attachment system has the lowest profile in comparison with the ball and bar attachments and is versatile up to 40° of divergence between two implants. By using locators as attachments, we can meet functional, economic and social expectation of patients with ease and satisfaction.

Two versus three narrow-diameter implants with locator attachments supporting mandibular overdentures: a two-year prospective study

Purpose. To compare treatment outcome (survival rate, condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues) and prosthodontic maintenance requirements of two versus three narrow-diameter bone level implants with Locator attachments supporting mandibular overdentures. Materials and Methods. Twenty completely edentulous patients with atrophic mandibles were treated. Ten patients (Group A) were treated with overdentures supported by two narrow (3.3-mm diameter) implants (Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) and ten patients (Group B) were treated with overdentures supported by three narrow implants. Locator (Zest Anchors, USA) attachments were used for prosthetic anchorage. Standardized clinical and radiographic parameters (survival rate, plaque index, calculus index, gingival index, bleeding index, probing depth and marginal bone loss) were evaluated at the time of the completion of the prosthetic treatment (baseline) and after 6, 12 and 24 months of functional loading. Prosthodontic maintenance requirements were also scored. Results. Only one implant was lost (Group B) during the healing period. There were no significant differences with regards to any of the studied clinical and radiographic parameters between the two groups (P > 0.05). Few prosthetic complications were recorded. Conclusions. No need to insert more than two narrow-diameter bone level implants with Locator attachments in cases of atrophic mandible to support an overdenture, however, long-term prospective studies are required to support this notion.