Masticatory function in patients with an extremely resorbed mandible restored with mandibular implant‐retained overdentures: comparison of three types of treatment protocols

Abstract

SUMMARYThe objective of the present study was to analyse the effects of implant supported overdentures on masticatory function in patients with an extremely resorbed mandible, and to compare the masticatory function in these patients using three differing types of implant treatment protocols. The mandibular overdentures were retained by a transmandibular implant, by four endosseous implants following augmentation of the mandible, and by four short endosseous implants, respectively. Sixty patients (50 women, 10 men, mean age 59AE4 years) were randomly allocated to one of the three treatment groups. Masticatory function was assessed before and after treatment using a questionnaire, a masticatory performance test, and a structured interview. The patient-based masticatory function improved significantly. Concerning these parameters there were no significant differences between the three groups before and after treatment. A significant difference existed between the three groups for the laboratory-assessed masticatory function before treatment, but after treatment this difference was no longer significant. From this study it can be concluded that patients with an extremely resorbed mandible and functional complaints of their lower denture report significant improvement in masticatory function after implant-overdenture treatment. Differences in masticatory function between the three studied modalities were not significant after treatment.

Effect of Different Bar Attachment and Clip Materials on Retention Force for Mandibular Implant Supported Overdentures (An Invitro Study)

“…Also the use of osseointegrated root form implant helped toward restoration of the oral sensory function. (5) The stability is superior when compared with that of the conventional denture. (6) The retention is enhanced by the mechanical attachment to the implants, as the retentive implant supported overdenture remains in place during mandibular movement resulting in improved speech and oral function.…”

Rehabilitation of Partial Mandibulectomy Using Implant-Supported Removable Prosthesis in an Irradiated Patient: Case Report

“…3,4 In healthy patients oral functions can be improved using implant supported prostheses, and this treatment has become important in the rehabilitation of oral cancer patients. [5][6][7] Implants can be inserted at the same stage of the primary reconstruction or not. Advantages of insertion of the implants at the same stage of the primary reconstruction are to avoid the need for a second surgery, to shorten the time of dental rehabilitation and to improve the social adjustment.…”

<i>Overdentures </i>mandibulares retidas por mini-implantes ou implantes convecionais: avaliação da função mastigatória e colonização microbiana

“…A função mastigatória de indivíduos com diferentes condições de dentição natural ou reabilitação protética tem sido avaliada, principalmente, por meio de testes que determinam a força de mordida, a capacidade de reduzir os alimentos a pequenas partículas, testes relacionados à percepção do indivíduo de sua própria função, avaliações da alteração dos movimentos mandibulares e atividade muscular e, mais recentemente, testes relacionados à capacidade do indivíduo em misturar e amassar o alimento (Boerrigter et al, 1995;Geertman et al, 1996;Pera et al, 1998;Geertman et al, 1999;Tang et al, 1999;FontijnTekamp et al, 2000;Raghoebar et al, 2000;Fontijn-Tekamp et al, 2001;Bakke et al, 2002;Van Kampen et al, 2002;Van Kampen et al, 2004;Griffitts et al, 2005;Stellingsma et al, 2005;Rismanchian et al, 2009;Van der Bilt et al, 2010aBorges et al, 2011;Harder et al, 2011;Preoteasa et al,. 2012;Scépanovic et al, 2012;Tanigawa et al, 2012;Van der Bilt et al, 2012;Sun et al, 2014;Vieira et al, 2014).…”

“…Dentre esses, destacam-se o Optocal e o Optosil, confeccionados com material de moldagem à base de silicone (Pera et al, 1998;Geertman et al, 1999;Fontijn-Tekamp et al, 2000;Van Kampen et al, 2004;Stellingsma et al, 2005;Van der Bilt et al, 2010a;Van der Bilt et al, 2010b;Borges et al, 2011). Entretanto, apesar das vantagens quanto à padronização destes simuladores de alimento artificial, indivíduos com dentição comprometida podem não ser capazes de fragmentá-los (Geertman et al, 1994;Van Kampen et al, 2004).…”

“…Ao mesmo tempo, estudos têm mostrado que a performance mastigatória independe do grau de retenção proporcionado por diferentes tipos de encaixe, tais como barraclipe e bola (Van Kampen et al, 2004;Stellingsma et al, 2005). Dessa forma, a diferença intrínseca dos dois tipos de dispositivos de retenção provavelmente não representou fonte relevante de variação nos testes de performance mastigatória.…”