Assessment of masticatory function of mandibular implant-supported overdenture wearers: A 3-year prospective study

Khalid, Taimur; Yunus, Norsiah Binti; Ibrahim, Norliza; Saleh, Nosizana Binti Mohd; Goode, David; Masood, Mohd

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.08.005

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The chewing efficiency improved significantly in both groups as with other studies of similar nature (Boven et al., 2015; Elsyad & Khairallah, 2017; Khalid et al., 2020), when evaluated according to the SA of the degree for color mixture by the investigator. However, the onset of the improvement was faster in the EG (T 0 ) than in the CG (T 2 ) and the overall effect was more evident in the EG than in the CG.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Mandibular two‐implant overdentures with CAD‐CAM milled bars with distal extensions or retentive anchors: A randomized controlled trial

Srinivasan

Schimmel

Buser

et al. 2020

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to demonstrate the noninferiority of mandibular 2-implant overdentures (IODs) on a CAD-CAM milled bar with long distal extensions (MBDE) against IODs on retentive anchors (RA). Methods: Forty edentulous participants rehabilitated with a maxillary conventional denture and a mandibular 2-IOD participated in this trial. They were randomized into two groups [Control group (CG): RA + gold matrices; Experimental group (EG): MBDE + gold clip]. The outcomes included implant survival rate (ISR), chewing efficiency [quantitative (VoH) and subjective (SA) assessments], peri-implant marginal bone levels (PI-MBL), maximum bite force (MBF), and patient-reported outcomes [oral health impact profile (OHIP-EDENT), and denture satisfaction index (DSI)]. Outcomes were recorded at baseline (BL), two weeks (T 0), 6 months (T 1), and at 1 year (T 2) after the intervention. Intra-and inter-group analyses were performed using regression models with ⍺=0.05. Results: 38 participants completed the T 2 visit (CG: n = 19, age = 74.7 ± 7.8 years; EG: n = 19, age = 70.3 ± 10.7 years). At T 2 , there was no implant loss in either of the groups (ISR = 100%). There were no significant differences between the groups for the PI-MBL changes (p = .754). Improvements occurred faster in the EG than in the CG, but over the observation time, there were no differences between the trial groups for VoH, MBF, OHIP-EDENT, and the DSI, except for SA being significantly better in the EG group (p = .022). Conclusions: The results of this RCT confirm that mandibular 2-IODs with a CAD-CAM milled bar with long distal extensions are not an inferior treatment to the conventional IODs on retentive anchors in the short term (1 year).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Mandibular two‐implant overdentures with CAD‐CAM milled bars with distal extensions or retentive anchors: A randomized controlled trial

Srinivasan

Schimmel

Buser

et al. 2020

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individual and group analyses showed that mandibular IR‐RDPs provide significant improvement in masticatory performance compared with complete RDPs. These findings are consistent with other publications 12,99‐102 . The current study also demonstrated that masticatory performance and adaptation to an implant‐retained prosthesis continued to positively change over 12 months.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…These findings are consistent with other publications. 12,[99][100][101][102] The current study also demonstrated that mas- RDPs. Some studies have correlated this to higher occlusal forces, masticatory muscle activity and more stable mandibular movements with implant prostheses compared with complete RDPs.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

The role of progressive oral implant rehabilitation in mastication, cognition and oral health‐related quality of life outcomes—A pilot to define the protocol

Tan

Foster

Korgaonkar

et al. 2020

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The implications of oral rehabilitation after tooth loss require further investigation. Objectives To conduct a pilot study to investigate: (a) changes in masticatory performance with progressive oral implant rehabilitation (POR); (b) association between POR and neurocognitive function using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); and (c) oral health‐related quality of life (OHQoL) outcomes. Methods Four completely edentulous patients (mean age: 73 ± 1.4 years) participated. Each received new complete removable dental prostheses (RDPs) transitioned to mandibular two implant‐retained RDPs (IR‐RDP). Assessments were performed at 4 time points for neurocognitive skills, fMRI with functional tasks (jaw clenching, working memory and sustained attention, inhibition), masticatory performance with colour‐changing gum and OHQoL. Assessments were performed with new complete RDPs (T0 as baseline data) and IR‐RDPs at 1 week (T1), 6 weeks (T2) and 12 months (T3) post‐insertion. Data analyses were based on intra‐patient and inter‐patient results. Results Masticatory performance and QoL improved with an IR‐RDP at each time point. FMRI jaw clenching sensory and motor cortical activity decreased at T1, with motor cortical activity increasing to T0 levels at T2. For cognitive fMRI activation tasks, cortical activity decreased from T0 to T1 across all regions of interests (ROI) and increased at T2 throughout the cognitive brain regions. Neurocognitive skills declined at T1, followed by improvement to or beyond T0 levels at T2. Conclusion Improvements in masticatory performance and OHQoL occurred from complete RDPs to IR‐RDP. Prosthetic adaptation was associated with neurocognitive changes to pre‐insertion activity levels or greater after 6 weeks. These pilot data suggest both behavioural and neural associations between POR and cognition; however, larger study numbers are required.

show abstract

“…Other studies, with shorter follow-up periods of 3 (15,26) and 5 years (14) respectively, appear to show similar signi cant improvement of OHRQoL after being treated with IODs. By contrast, no such difference was found in a retrospective study (27) conducted after four years between patients treated with IODs and conventional dentures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Two of these studies also report denture satisfaction (26,27), but with instruments different from each other and the present study. Even if not directly comparable, apparent high levels of denture satisfaction were recorded.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

An 8- to 10-Year Follow-up of Denture Satisfaction and Oral Health–Related Quality of Life with Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures

Mukilvannan¹,

Gjerde²,

Schriwer³

et al. 2021

Int J Prosthodont

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This 10-year follow-up study reports denture satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life of edentulous patients treated with two-implant mandibular overdentures. Methods: This is a follow-up of a previous study carried out between 1997-2005. Originally, the patients were randomly divided into two groups: one receiving two-implant mandibular overdentures (IODs) and another, relined mandibular dentures (RCDs). The latter group were offered and accepted IODs at two years, which then became another IOD group. The main outcome variable of this study is patient opinion over time of the IODs. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire containing demographics, 15 variables of denture satisfaction, and 20 questions of the Oral Health-Related Impact Pro le (OHIP-20). Comparison between groups were made with Mann-Whitney U-tests for denture variables and T-tests for OHIP-20 variables. Changes over time were analysed with multilevel linear models for denture variables and multilevel ordinal regression analyses for OHIP-20 variables. Results: Of the 54 original participants, 29 responded. Disregarding patients who had died at 10 years, this represented a response rate 76%. In the IOD group, the degree of denture satisfaction and OHIP-20 scores remained high and stable over the 10-years period for all but one variable. The RCD group showed a modest improvement of denture satisfaction and OHIP-20 scores for the rst two years. After treatment with IODs, these variables improved at 10 years to the same level as the original IOD group. Conclusions: The positive effect on denture satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life of edentulous patients treated with two-implant mandibular overdenture remains unchanged 10 years after treatment, con rming the advice that this should be the standard treatment for the edentulous mandible.

show abstract

Assessment of masticatory function of mandibular implant-supported overdenture wearers: A 3-year prospective study

Cited by 15 publications

References 34 publications

Mandibular two‐implant overdentures with CAD‐CAM milled bars with distal extensions or retentive anchors: A randomized controlled trial

Mandibular two‐implant overdentures with CAD‐CAM milled bars with distal extensions or retentive anchors: A randomized controlled trial

The role of progressive oral implant rehabilitation in mastication, cognition and oral health‐related quality of life outcomes—A pilot to define the protocol

An 8- to 10-Year Follow-up of Denture Satisfaction and Oral Health–Related Quality of Life with Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About