Introduction The overdenture is an alternative to fixed implant-supported prosthesis for its relatively low-cost and in clinical cases where it is impossible to place multiple implants with appropriate number and arrangement in the arch to support a fixed prosthesis. In implant-supported overdentures, many attachments such as bars, ball, and magnets can be used. The anchorage system affects the retention and stability of the overdenture as well as the load transfer to the implant and the bone. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the exerted stresses on implants and implant–abutment interface by comparing different attachment systems used for implant-supported maxillary and mandibular overdentures using finite-element analysis. Materials and Methods Stress distribution in five different models with different attachments were evaluated using finite-element analysis. The studied attachment systems were Ball/O-ring and bar-clip attachments. Three models in mandible were studied, two implants with ball attachments, two implants with bar, and four implants connected with a bar. In maxilla, two models were studied, four implants with ball attachments, and four implants connected with bar. Forces were applied bilaterally on each model in the canine and molar region separately. The forces applied were 35N axially, 70N obliquely, and 10N horizontally. Results The ball attachments models showed the highest amount of stresses on the bone and on the implants in maxilla and mandible. The bar-clip attachment with four implants showed least stress in maxilla as well as in the mandible. The bar on four implants has better stress distribution as compared with the bar on the two implants.

Nowadays, people desire to look attractive and have become very alert about their appearance and smile. Since the face is most exposed part of our body, and mouth a prominent feature, teeth are getting enormous share of attention. Intraoral jewellery has currently gained popularity and is slowly becoming a craze, but this fashion trend is also associated with some significant health issues. These ornaments though are said to enhance beauty cause problems such as increase pain, infection, scar formation, tooth fractures, metal hyper-sensitivity reactions, localized periodontal disease, speech impediment, and nerve damage. This review draws special attention to the prevalence, complications, and side effects of dental jewellery in humans. Here we suggest people must be aware of all the risks associated with wearing dental jewellery, and they should undergo dental check-ups regularly.

Introduction Marginal bone level is the criterion for implant success. Patient expectations for more natural looking implant restorations created the need to restore implants with more esthetically pleasing materials like Zirconia rather than conventional porcelain-fused to-metal (PFM) crowns. The aim of this study was to evaluate marginal bone loss around dental implants clinically and radiographically when restored with Zirconia and PFM prosthesis. Materials and Methods Two groups (control and test) were formed with 14 patients each. In the control group, the subjects were rehabilitated with PFM crowns and in the test group, the subjects were rehabilitated with Zirconia crowns. Rehabilitation was done after the healing period of 3 months. Radiographic evaluation was done at regular (baseline, 3rd, 6th, and 12th month) intervals. Results The results were statistically analyzed. Keeping in mind the limitations of the study, it was revealed that the difference in the crestal bone resorption in both the groups was not significant.

Denture esthetics in the field of prosthodontics has become a prime most demand of the edentulous patients in the recent time. The different processes that are required in the fabrication of complete denture in terms of esthetics constitutes from impression making, selection of teeth, occlusion, proper vertical dimension, accurate recording of the occlusal plane and a good smile line.