Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Payne AG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6516946 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws.
Payne Alan Gt AG Alsabeeha Nabeel Hm NH Atieh Momen A MA Esposito Marco M Ma Sunyoung S Anas El-Wegoud Marwah M
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20181011
<h4>Background</h4>Implant overdentures are one of the most common treatment options used to rehabilitate edentulous patients. Attachment systems are used to anchor the overdentures to implants. The plethora of attachment systems available dictates a need for clinicians to understand their prosthodontic and patient-related outcomes.<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare different attachment systems for maxillary and mandibular implant overdentures by assessing prosthodontic success, prosthodontic mainten ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods: This prospective study assessed patients presenting complete maxillary edentulism, rehabilitated by means of implant-supported overdentures (n = 20), 10 with Locator® axial retention (ODA group) and 10 with overdentures on bars (ODB group). Patients also completed a questionnaire to determine their satisfaction with treatment. Results: The mean follow-up time in both groups was 11.4 years, with follow-up times in both groups ranging from 5 to 14 years. The ODA group suffered mechanical complications such as retention loss, need for nylon retention insert changes, resin fracture, and need for relining. In the ODB group, prosthetic dental wear, screw loosening, and complete prosthetic failure were more common. A total of 19 implants failed (23.8%); of these, 11 were in the ODA group (failure rate = 27.5%) and eight in the ODB group (failure rate = 20%). The patient satisfaction questionnaire obtained a mean score of 7.9 out of 10 in the ODA group, and 9.75 in the ODB group. Conclusions: in rehabilitations of edentulous maxillar by means of implant-supported overdentures, both the systems assessed were shown to be effective in the medium to long term. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with the treatments received.
| S-EPMC7143068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to analyze post-loading implant loss for implant-supported prostheses in edentulous jaws, regarding a potential impact of implant location (maxilla vs. mandible), implant number per patient, type of prosthesis (removable vs. fixed), and type of attachment system (screw-retained, ball vs. bar vs. telescopic crown).Material and methodsA systematic literature search for randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective studies was conducted within PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Quality assessment of the included studies was carried out, and the review was structured according to PRISMA. Implant loss and corresponding 3- and 5-year survival rates were estimated by means of a Poisson regression model with total exposure time as offset.ResultsAfter title, abstract, and full-text screening, 54 studies were included for qualitative analyses. Estimated 5-year survival rates of implants were 97.9% [95% CI 97.4; 98.4] in the maxilla and 98.9% [95% CI 98.7; 99.1] in the mandible. Corresponding implant loss rates per 100 implant years were significantly higher in the maxilla (0.42 [95% CI 0.33; 0.53] vs. 0.22 [95% CI 0.17; 0.27]; P = 0.0001). Implant loss rates for fixed restorations were significantly lower compared to removable restorations (0.23 [95% CI 0.18; 0.29] vs. 0.35 [95% CI 0.28; 0.44]; P = 0.0148). Four implants and a fixed restoration in the mandible resulted in significantly higher implant loss rates compared to five or more implants with a fixed restoration. The analysis of one implant and a mandibular overdenture also revealed higher implant loss rates than an overdenture on two implants. The same (lower implant number = higher implant loss rate) applied when comparing 2 vs. 4 implants and a mandibular overdenture. Implant loss rates for maxillary overdentures on <4 implants were significantly higher than for four implants (7.22 [95% CI 5.41; 9.64] vs. 2.31 [1.56; 3.42]; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsImplant location, type of restoration, and implant number do have an influence on the estimated implant loss rate. Consistent reporting of clinical studies is necessary and high-quality studies are needed to confirm the present results.
| S-EPMC5024059 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aims to show the long-time stability of straight and tilted implants loaded immediately with a provisional resin bridge followed by a definitive prosthodontic rehabilitation in edentulous jaws despite difficult hygiene conditions postoperatively. RESULTS:This study included the participation of 23 patients and the restoration of 170 dental implants in 32 edentulous jaws. Patient data was analyzed from the start of treatment with a minimum follow-up period of 6?years in order to determine long-term implant success rates. However, the age of patients at time of surgery significantly affected the BOP to the detriment of younger patients (median 62?years old). CONCLUSION:Although there was a higher risk of implant failure due to general disease, all the implants in this study survived successfully. As a replacement for a complete dental arch, the reduced number of implants in combination with the avoidance of augmentations reduces treatment costs. The immediate fixed prosthetic restoration of edentulous jaws thus represents a reliable therapeutic alternative to a two- to three-stage procedure. Optimized aftercare including professional teeth cleaning (PTC) (at least twice a year) can minimize the anamnestic effect of smoking, diabetes mellitus, and osteoporosis on BOP and possible bone loss.
| S-EPMC7391463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:To evaluate the accuracy of a computer numerical control (CNC) milled surgical guide for implant placement in edentulous jaws. METHODS:Edentulous patients seeking implants treatment were recruited in this prospective cohort study. Radiographic guides with diagnostic templates were fabricated from wax-up dentures. Patients took cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) wearing the radiopaque radiographic guides. Implant positions were virtually designed in the planning software based on the CBCT data, and the radiographic templates were converted into surgical guides using CNC milling technique. Forty-four implants were placed into 12 edentulous jaws following guided implant surgery protocol. Post-surgery CBCT scans were made for each jaw, and the deviations between the planned and actual implant positions were measured. Deviation of implant position was compared between maxilla and mandible, and between cases with and without anchor pins using independent t-test. RESULTS:Nine patients (3 males and 6 females) with 12 edentulous jaws were recruited. The mean age of patients was 59.2?±?13.9 years old. All 44 implants was placed without complication and survived, the mean three dimensional linear deviation of implant position between virtual planning and actual placement was 1.53?±?0.48 mm at the implant neck and 1.58?±?0.49 mm at the apex. The angular deviation was 3.96?±?3.05 degrees. No significant difference was found in the deviation of implant position between maxilla and mandible (P?=?0.28 at neck, 0.08 at apex), nor between cases with and without anchor pins (P?=?0.87 at neck, 0.06 at apex). CONCLUSIONS:The guides fabricated using the CNC milling technique provided comparable accuracy as those fabricated by Stereolithography. The displacement of the guides on edentulous arch might be the main contributing factor of deviation. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-ONC-17014159 (July 26, 2017).
| S-EPMC7579824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSingle-implant mandibular overdentures (SIMOs) are one of the least invasive implant treatments for edentulism. The new Novaloc attachment system can improve the clinical performance of implant-retained overdentures but has not been tested for SIMOs.ObjectivesTo compare Novaloc and a gold standard system (Locator) for SIMOs in an edentate elderly population in terms of patient-reported outcomes and device- and treatment-related complications.MethodsIn this single-center crossover randomized clinical trial (RCT), 10 edentulous participants received an implant in the lower midline and had their lower complete dentures converted to SIMOs. The participants received each attachment system for 3 mo in a randomized order, followed by measurement of patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life via the McGill Denture Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Oral Health Impact Profile for Edentulous People questionnaire, respectively. Complications were registered throughout the RCT. Patients were interviewed for their experiences with SIMOs and preference for one of the attachment systems. Quantitative analysis employed mixed linear models and chi-square tests (α = 0.05), whereas interview data underwent thematic analysis and, in turn, integration into quantitative data (mixed methods explanatory design).ResultsAll 10 randomized participants completed the trial. Mean ± SD general satisfaction was 92% ± 8% with Novaloc versus 85% ± 13% with Locator (mean difference, 9%; 95% CI, 1% to 17%). For specific McGill Denture Satisfaction Questionnaire items, only denture stability was significantly increased for Novaloc. Seven participants preferred Novaloc over Locator at the end of the RCT (chi-square, P = 0.045). No difference was found between the attachments in terms of oral health-related quality of life based on the Oral Health Impact Profile for Edentulous People and complications. Thematic analysis revealed high patient satisfaction with SIMOs, with denture stability the main criterion for their satisfaction and attachment preference.ConclusionAmong elderly edentulous patients wearing SIMOs, Novaloc led to increased patient satisfaction and preference. Better patient-perceived denture stability may explain this result. The attachment systems exhibited similar short-term maintenance needs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03126942 (first registered on April 13, 2017). Secondary identifiers: A03-M07-17A (McGill University, Institutional Review Board) and 2018-3873 (McGill University Health Centre, Research Ethics Board).Knowledge transfer statementThe results of this mixed methods study can be used by clinicians when choosing which attachment system to use for SIMOs. Results suggest that edentulous patients prefer attachments with a better-defined seating position, such as that of the Novaloc system, as opposed to the nylon matrix on metallic abutment of the Locator system.
| S-EPMC10725123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 23 edentulous jaws treated with 3D software planning, guided surgery, and immediate loading and restored with CAD-CAM full arch frameworks. Materials and Methods. This work was designed as a prospective case series clinical study. Twenty patients have been consecutively rehabilitated with an immediately loaded implant supported fixed full prosthesis. A total of 120 fixtures supporting 23 bridges were placed. 117 out of 120 implants were immediately loaded. Outcome measures were implants survival, radiographic marginal bone levels and remodeling, soft tissue parameters, and complications. Results. 114 of 117 implants reached a 30 months follow-up, and no patients dropped out from the study. The cumulative survival rate was 97.7%; after 30 months, mean marginal bone level was 1.25 ± 0.31 mm, mean marginal bone remodeling value was 1.08 ± 0.34, mean PPD value was 2.84 ± 0.55 mm, and mean BOP value was 4% ± 2.8%. Only minor prosthetic complications were recorded. Conclusion. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that computer-guided surgery and immediate loading seem to represent a viable option for the immediate rehabilitations of completely edentulous jaws with fixed implant supported restorations. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01866696.
| S-EPMC3745845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo evaluate the influence of primary insertion torque (IT) values of narrow dental implants on the peri-implant health, implant stability, immunoinflammatory responses, bone loss, and success and survival rates.MethodsThirty-one edentulous patients received two narrow implants (2.9x10mm, Facility NeoPoros) to retain mandibular overdentures. The implants were categorized in four groups according to their IT: (G1) IT > 10 Ncm; (G2) IT ≥ 10Ncm and ≤ 30 Ncm; (G3) IT >30Ncm and < 45Ncm; (G4) IT ≥ 45Ncm, and all implants were loaded after 3 months of healing. The following clinical outcomes were evaluated 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after implant insertion: (i) peri-implant tissue health (PH), gingival index (GI), plaque index (PI), calculus presence (CP), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP); (ii) implant stability quotient (ISQ) by resonance frequency analysis; and (iii) IL-1β and TNF-α concentration in the peri-implant crevicular fluid. The marginal bone level (MBL) and changes (MBC) were evaluated. The Chi2 test, Kruskal-Wallis test, mixed-effects regression analysis, and the Kendall rank correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis (α = 5%).ResultsG1 presented the highest PD at all evaluated periods. G2 presented higher PI at month 6 and 12. G4 showed increased GI at month 3 and 12 and more CP at month 1 (p=.003). G2 and G4 had higher ISQ values over the study period, while those from G1 and G3 presented lower ISQ values. The IL-1β concentration increased until month 12 and was independent of IT and bone type; G4 had a higher IL-1β concentration in month 3 than the other groups (p=.015). The TNF-α release was negatively correlated with IT, and TNF-α release was highest in G1 at month 12. The MBL immediately after surgery and the MBC at month 12 were similar between the groups, and G4 presented a positive MBC at month 12. The survival and success rates were 75% for G1, 81.3% for G2, 64.3% for G3, and 95% for G4.ConclusionThe IT did not influence the clinical outcomes and the peri-implant immunoinflammatory responses and was weakly correlated with the narrow dental implants primary stability. The observed success rates suggest that the ideal IT for atrophic fully edentulous patients may deviate from the standardized IT of 32 Ncm.
| S-EPMC6582836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of half-way digital mucosa-supported implant guides (HDMIGs) for edentulous jaws.MethodsNinety-five consecutive patients (859 implants) with edentulous jaws who underwent implant placement using an HDMIG from July 2012 to June 2018 were retrospectively identified. The primary endpoint was implant-related complications (nerve injury and unexpected perforation), and the secondary endpoints were the faciolingual distance, mesiodistal distance, buccolingual angle, and mesiodistal angle. Follow-ups occurred at 1 month, 2 months, and then every 2 months following implant placement.ResultsTwenty-seven (28.4%) patients met the exclusion criteria, leaving 68 eligible patients (636 implants) for the final analysis. The median follow-up was 24 months (range, 18-27 months). No patients developed nerve injury, revision, or unexpected perforation. At the final follow-up, the mean faciolingual distance was 0.65 ± 0.16 mm, the mean mesiodistal distance was 1.16 ± 0.61 mm, the mean buccolingual angle was 4.04° ± 2.26°, and the mean mesiodistal angle was 3.75° ± 2.56°. In the comparison of the first month after surgery and the last follow-up, no significant differences were detected in any of the four measured variables.ConclusionUse of an HDMIG may be a convenient and safe method to ensure correct implantation.
| S-EPMC8166388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Overdentures retained by a single implant in the midline have arisen as a minimal implant treatment for edentulous mandibles. The success of this treatment depends on the performance of a single stud attachment that is susceptible to wear-related retention loss. Recently developed biomaterials used in attachments may result in better performance of the overdentures, offering minimal retention loss and greater patient satisfaction. These biomaterials include resistant polymeric matrixes and amorphous diamond-like carbon applied on metallic components. The objective of this explanatory mixed-methods study is to compare Novaloc, a novel attachment system with such characteristics, to a traditional alternative for single implants in the mandible of edentate elderly patients. METHODS/DESIGN:We will carry out a randomized cross-over clinical trial comparing Novaloc attachments to Locators for single-implant mandibular overdentures in edentate elderly individuals. Participants will be followed for three months with each attachment type; patient-based, clinical, and economic outcomes will be gathered. A sample of 26 participants is estimated to be required to detect clinically relevant differences in terms of the primary outcome (patient ratings of general satisfaction). Participants will choose which attachment they wish to keep, then be interviewed about their experiences and preferences with a single implant prosthesis and with the two attachments. Data from the quantitative and qualitative assessments will be integrated through a mixed-methods explanatory strategy. A last quantitative assessment will take place after 12 months with the preferred attachment; this latter assessment will enable measurement of the attachments' long-term wear and maintenance requirements. DISCUSSION:Our results will lead to evidence-based recommendations regarding these systems, guiding providers and patients when making decisions on which attachment systems and implant numbers will be most appropriate for individual cases. The recommendation of a specific attachment for elderly edentulous patients may combine positive outcomes from patient perspectives with low cost, good maintenance, and minimal invasiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03126942 . Registered on 13 April 2017.
| S-EPMC5913792 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of this study was to examine systematically the data published on the cost and cost-effectiveness of mandibular two-implant-retained overdentures compared to other removable prosthodontic treatment options for edentulous mandible.Settings and designIt is a systematic review which analyses the available data from the prospective and retrospective studies and randomized clinical trials to find out costs and cost effectiveness of different removable treatment modalities for completely edentulous mandible. The study protocol was decided according to PRISMA guidelines.Materials and methodsThe search was limited to English literature only and included an electronic search through PubMed Central, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and complemented by hand-searching. All clinical trials published up to August 2019 were included (without any starting limit). Two independent investigators extracted the data and assessed the studies.Statistical analysis usedNo meta-analysis was conducted because of the high heterogeneity of data.ResultsOut of the initial 509 records, only nine studies were included. The risks of bias of individual studies were assessed. Six studies presented data on cost and cost analysis only. The rest three articles provided data on cost-effectiveness. The overall costs of implant overdentures were higher than the conventional complete dentures. However, implant overdentures were more cost-effective when compared to conventional complete dentures. Single-implant overdentures are also less expensive than two-implant overdentures. Overdentures supported by two or four mini-implants were also reported as more cost-effective than conventional two-implant-supported overdentures.ConclusionsTwo-implant-retained overdentures are more expensive but cost-effective than the conventional complete dentures. Two- or four-mini-implant-retained overdentures are less expensive than two-implant-retained overdentures, but there is a lack of long-term data on aftercare cost and survival rate of mini-implants. Single-implant overdentures are also less expensive than the two-implant-retained overdentures. The differences of the aftercare costs of different attachment systems for implant overdentures were not significant. There is a need of further studies on comparative cost-effectiveness of different types of implant overdentures.
| S-EPMC7335021 | biostudies-literature