Bone Loss in the Posterior Edentulous Mandible with Implant-Supported Overdentures vs Complete Dentures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Oh, Won-Suk; Saglik, Berna; Bak, Sun‐Yung

doi:10.11607/ijp.6636

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result was consistent with Oh et al (2020) [33] who indicated the significance of additional implant placement in the posterior mandible for preservation of the residual alveolar ridge ,as bone loss in the posterior edentulous mandible was found to be lower when the mandible was restored with 4 IOD rather than with 2 IOD. Although, bone loss in the posterior edentulous mandible was similar when the mandible was rehabilitated with either 2 IOD or CD.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Mandibular bone height changes in two different design concepts of four implant assisted overdenture

Elmowafy

Fouad

Elmekkawy

et al. 2021

int.jour.sci.res.mana.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This comparative study was conducted to compare between two different design concepts of four implant assisted complete mandibular overdenture regarding the residual alveolar bone height changes.Materials and Methods: Ten healthy completely edentulous male patients were selected for this study. For each patient, a conventional complete denture was constructed. Each mandibular denture was duplicated to be used as a radiographic stent, then the CBCT surgical guide template was printed according to each design concept of 4-implant overdenture. The CBCT surgical guide templates were used for installing the implants according to flapless surgical technique followed by delayed loading. According to the two design concepts of the 4-implant overdenture used in this study, the patients were randomly classified into two equal groups: group [A]had two vertical canine implants with two axial 1st molar short implants (short design concept), and group [B]had two vertical canine implants with two distally inclined premolar implants (inclined design concept). Radiographic evaluations were performed immediately (T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) respectively after picking up of the ball attachments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Mandibular bone height changes in two different design concepts of four implant assisted overdenture

Elmowafy

Fouad

Elmekkawy

et al. 2021

int.jour.sci.res.mana.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It seems intuitive, that adding posterior support to the 2‐implant overdenture would increase the MBF and chewing efficiency, as the denture saddles are no longer supported by the mucosa, but by the rigid extension of the implant bar (Oh et al., 2020). In a complete denture, the highest chewing forces are measured in the center of mastication, located at the lowest point of the ridge, parallel maxillary and mandibular ridges, and ideally an inter‐crestal angle of 90°.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…Then, the use of direct support on implants that are ankylotically connected to the bone relieves the structure of the denture bearing area, especially in case of a mucous membrane poor susceptibility. This contributes to protecting the underlying tissues, which are not physiologically adapted to sustain direct occlusal forces, which may lead to bony atrophy in a short time [ 44 , 45 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Biomechanical Properties of Implant-Retained Overdenture Based on Precision Attachment Type

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to compare, in vitro, the biomechanical properties of an overdenture retained by two bar-retained implants and an overdenture retained by two bar-retained implants with ball attachments. An edentulous mandible model was prepared for the study based on the FRASACO mold with two implants. In the first system, the “rider” type (PRECI-HORIX, CEKA) retention structure and the complete mandibular denture with the matrix were made. In the second system, the “rider” type retention suprastructure was also used. In the distal part, (CEKA) clips were placed symmetrically, and a complete mandibular denture, together with the matrix on the bar, and the clip patrices were made. A numerical model was developed for each system where all elements were positioned and related to geometric relations, as in reality. The FEA analysis (finite element analysis) was carried out for seven types of loads: with vertical forces of 20, 50, and 100 N and oblique forces of 20 and 50 N acting on individual teeth of the denture, namely central incisor, canine, and first molar. Displacements, stresses, and deformations within the systems were investigated. Maximum denture displacement in the first system was 0.7 mm. Maximum bar stress amounted to 27.528 MPa, and implant stress to 23.16 MPa. Maximum denture displacement in the second system was 0.6 mm. Maximum bar stress amounted to 578.6 MPa, that of clips was 136.99 MPa, and that of implants was 51.418 MPa. Clips cause smaller displacement of the overdenture when it is loaded but generate higher stress within the precision elements and implants compared to a denture retained only by a bar. Regardless of the shape of the precision element, small deformations occur that mainly affect the mucosa and the matrix.

show abstract

Bone Loss in the Posterior Edentulous Mandible with Implant-Supported Overdentures vs Complete Dentures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cited by 14 publications

References 8 publications

Mandibular bone height changes in two different design concepts of four implant assisted overdenture

Mandibular bone height changes in two different design concepts of four implant assisted overdenture

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

A Comparison of Biomechanical Properties of Implant-Retained Overdenture Based on Precision Attachment Type

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About