No abstract

Biting force was related mainly to the quality of denture support. Muscle activity was higher in patients with conventional denture than with implant-supported prostheses (with or without attachments).

Purpose: The aim of this study was to test the signifi cant diff erences of the marginal bone loss (MBL) between screw retained versus cemented prosthesis. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive electronic searching in PubMed and Cochrane databases up to July 2015 with language restriction to English only. We include any randomized controlled trials compare between screw retained versus cemented retained implant prosthesis regarding MBL. In addition, a manual searching was performed for related journals from January 2011 to May 2015. A meta-analysis was performed on all included studies by using a random eff ect model (mean, 95% confi dence intervals [CI]) to pool the eff ect size as a heterogeneity among studies was high (P < 0.0001 and I² = 88%). Result: Initial screening and manual searching result in 199 articles from which only 4 articles compatible with our inclusion criteria. No statistical signifi cance was found between screw retained and cemented retained prosthesis regarding MBL (confi dence interval CI = 95 and P = 0.26). Conclusion:No strong evidence to support the diff erence between screw retained and cemented retained implant prosthesis in the amount of MBL as a measure for periimplantitis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate biting force of patients with unilateral mandibular distal extension area treated with two different designs of the removable partial denture (RPD), conventional RPD, and new design of extracoronal castable precision attachment (OT Unilateral attachment). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on 16 patients with unilateral mandibular distal extension area with the second premolar is the last abutment teeth. The patients were divided into two equal groups, Group I received conventional RPD, which provides cross arch stabilization and a double Aker clasp was fabricated. Group II received new design of extracoronal castable precision attachment (OT Unilateral attachment). Evaluation of biting force by loadstar sensor, patients of both groups were evaluated at the time of prosthesis insertion, 3, 6, and 1 year later. Statistical analysis performing one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey’s post hoc test to compare between all follow-up periods within each group, comparison between two groups regarding each follow-up period was performed by independent t-test. RESULTS: Both treatments yielded better after-treatment summary when compared with the baseline; however, better results were obtained and showed a statistically significant increase in Group II (OT unilateral design), especially after 3, 6 months, and 1 year later. CONCLUSION: From the results of this study, it was concluded that: It is preferable to use the new design of extracoronal castable precision attachment (OT unilateral) being simpler, more comfortable to the patients and give high masticatory efficiency in the form of biting force than conventional RPD.