Immediate versus Delayed Attachment Incorporation Impact on Prosthetic Aftercare among Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdenture Wearers

Background: Substantial effort is dedicated to finding the most favorable parameters that will ensure low aftercare demands among edentulous patients wearing mandibular implant supported overdentures (MISODs). The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare prosthetic aftercare between MISOD patients with a simultaneous (group A) vs. a three-week settling in period (group B) prior to attachment incorporation. Methods: Forty-five patients enrolled in this study. Two implants per patient were placed using a two-stage implant insertion protocol. Second-stage surgery was performed after three months. All patients received ball attachments using the direct (chairside) incorporation method. Twenty-two patients received their dentures with simultaneous attachment activation and the rest—twenty-three patients—after a three-week settling in period. Patients’ files were scanned for aftercare visits. Outcome parameters included sore spot relief, attachment incorporation, and denture repair. Additionally, gingival index measurements were compared. Confounding factors included age, gender, and implant dimensions. Results: The mean follow-up for the entire cohort was 84 ± 21 months, and the range 39–120 months. The mean number of visits for group A vs. B respectively: pressure sores relieve (3.63 ± 0.84 vs. 3.71 ± 0.61, p = 0.581), liner exchange due to loss of retention (2.09 ± 1.03 vs. 2.31 ± 1.04 p = 0.487), and gingival index (1.3 ± 0.3 vs. 1.03 ± 0.2, p = 0.653) exhibited no statistically significant differences between the tested groups. No statistically significant differences between the groups were also noted for the denture repair aftercare treatments (p = 0.318) and the independent variables including age, gender, and implant length. Conclusions: Prosthetic aftercare in MISOD wearers is similar whether a simultaneous or a three-week settling in period for attachment incorporation is applied.

Effect of various putty-wash impression techniques on marginal fit of cast crowns

Marginal fit is an important clinical factor that affects restoration longevity. The accuracy of three polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques was compared by marginal fit assessment using the nondestructive method. A stainless steel master cast containing three abutments with three metal crowns matching the three preparations was used to make 45 impressions: group A = single-step technique (putty and wash impression materials used simultaneously), group B = two-step technique with a 2-mm relief (putty as a preliminary impression to create a 2-mm wash space followed by the wash stage), and group C = two-step technique with a polyethylene spacer (plastic spacer used with the putty impression followed by the wash stage). Accuracy was assessed using a toolmaker microscope to measure and compare the marginal gaps between each crown and finish line on the duplicated stone casts. Each abutment was further measured at the mesial, buccal, and distal aspects. One-way analysis of variance was used for statistical analysis. P values and Scheffe post hoc contrasts were calculated. Significance was determined at .05. One-way analysis of variance showed significant differences among the three impression techniques in all three abutments and at all three locations (P < .001). Group B yielded dies with minimal gaps compared to groups A and C. The two-step impression technique with 2-mm relief was the most accurate regarding the crucial clinical factor of marginal fit.

Post-traumatic implant-supported restoration of the anterior maxillary teeth using cancellous bone block allografts

PURPOSE

To prospectively evaluate the outcome of dental implants placed in the post-traumatic anterior maxilla after ridge augmentation with cancellous freeze-dried block bone allografts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients presenting with a history of anterior dentoalveolar trauma with bony deficiencies in the sagittal (≥3 mm) and vertical (<3 mm) planes according to computed tomography were included. The recipient sites were reconstructed with cancellous bone block allografts. After 6 months of healing, implants were placed. The primary outcomes of interest were 1) bone measurements taken before grafting, at the time of implant placement, and at stage 2 operations; 2) implant survival; and 3) complications.

RESULTS

The sample was composed of 20 consecutive patients with a mean age of 25 ± 7 years. We used 28 cancellous allogeneic bone blocks, and 31 implants were inserted. Of the 31 implants, 12 were immediately restored. The mean follow-up was 42 ± 15 months. Graft and implant survival rates were 92.8% and 96.8%, respectively. Mean bone gain in the sagittal and vertical planes was 5 ± 0.5 mm horizontally and 2 ± 0.5 mm (P < .001). Successful restoration was achieved in all patients with fixed implant-supported prostheses. Soft tissue complications occurred in 7 patients (35%). Complications after cementation of the crowns were seen in 3 implants (9.6%). All implants remained clinically osseointegrated at the end of the follow-up examination. There was no crestal bone loss around the implants beyond the first implant thread.

CONCLUSION

Cancellous block allograft can be used successfully for post-traumatic implant-supported restoration in the anterior maxilla.

Long-term outcome of cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported partial restorations

PURPOSE

The present study was designed to compare the long-term outcome and complications of cemented versus screw-retained implant restorations in partially edentulous patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with bilateral partial posterior edentulism comprised the study group. Implants were placed, and cemented or screw-retained restorations were randomly assigned to the patients in a split-mouth design. Follow-up (up to 15 years) examinations were performed every 6 months in the first year and every 12 months in subsequent years. The following parameters were evaluated and recorded at each recall appointment: ceramic fracture, abutment screw loosening, metal frame fracture, Gingival Index, and marginal bone loss.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were treated with 221 implants to support partial prostheses. No implants during the follow-up period (mean follow-up, 66 ± 47 months for screw-retained restorations [range, 18 to 180 months] and 61 ± 40 months for cemented restorations [range, 18 to 159 months]). Ceramic fracture occurred significantly more frequently (P < .001) in screw-retained (38% ± 0.3%) than in cemented (4% ± 0.1%) restorations. Abutment screw loosening occurred statistically significantly more often (P = .001) in screw-retained (32% ± 0.3%) than in cement-retained (9% ± 0.2%) restorations. There were no metal frame fractures in either type of restoration. The mean Gingival Index scores were statistically significantly higher (P < .001) for screw-retained (0.48 ± 0.5) than for cemented (0.09 ± 0.3) restorations. The mean marginal bone loss was statistically significantly higher (P < .001) for screw-retained (1.4 ± 0.6 mm) than for cemented (0.69 ± 0.5 mm) restorations.

CONCLUSION

The long-term outcome of cemented implant-supported restorations was superior to that of screw-retained restorations, both clinically and biologically.