-
European Journal of Oral Implantology 2017To compare prosthesis and implant failure, patient satisfaction, prosthetic complications and peri-implant marginal bone loss of mandibular overdentures (IOD) supported... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
PURPOSE
To compare prosthesis and implant failure, patient satisfaction, prosthetic complications and peri-implant marginal bone loss of mandibular overdentures (IOD) supported by a single or two implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Manual and electronic database (PubMed and Cochrane) searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials, without language restriction, comparing single vs two implant supported mandibular overdentures. Two investigators extracted data independently. The Cochrane tool was used for assessing the quality of included studies. Meta-analyses were performed for the included RCTs.
RESULTS
Six publications corresponding to four RCTs were identified. Three RCTs (corresponding to five publications) were included and one trial was excluded. Follow-ups in function were 1, 3 and 5 years after loading. All included studies were considered to be at a high risk of bias. The pooled result revealed more prosthesis failures at overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02), however, there were non-significant differences at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.22; Risk Difference: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.83, 0.19) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.24). Regarding implant failures, there were more implant losses in overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: -0.15, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.02), however, there were non-significant difference at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.2; Risk Difference: -0.33, 95% CI: -0.84, 0.18). After 5 years in function, meta-analyses revealed that there were non-significant differences regarding overall prosthetic complications when mandibular overdentures supported by a single implant were compared with overdentures supported by two implants (P = 0.43; RD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.06, 0.15).
CONCLUSION
Mandibular overdentures retained by a single implant have comparable results to those retained by two implants. However, this should be interpreted with caution as all the included studies were considered at a high risk of bias.
Topics: Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28944354
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related... Apr 2018Implant-supported overdenture is one of the most predictable treatment options used in complete edentulism. However, differences have been reported between bar and ball... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Implant-supported overdenture is one of the most predictable treatment options used in complete edentulism. However, differences have been reported between bar and ball attachments used to retain overdentures in terms of patient satisfaction and prosthesis retention.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of bar and ball attachments for conventionally loaded implant-supported overdentures in completely edentulous patients to improve patient satisfaction and prosthesis retention.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted the review according to the Cochrane methods and following MECIR standards. We searched Cochrane Oral Health Group Trial register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and the WHO ICTRP (March 31, 2017). Two review authors assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked for accuracy. We have expressed results as risk ratio or mean differences, together with their 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
We included 10 trials (465 participants). After 5 y, one trial reported higher patient satisfaction when bar attachment was used (MD 1.30, 95% CI 0.20-2.40), and reported no difference between both systems in prosthesis retention (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.90 to 0.10). Two trials reported no implant failures after 1 and 5 y in both attachments. Downgrading of evidence was based on the unclear risk of bias of included studies and the wide CI crossing the line of no effect.
CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to support bar or ball attachment to be used with implant-supported overdentures in completely edentulous patients to improve patient satisfaction and prosthesis retention (PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014014594).
Topics: Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture Retention; Denture, Overlay; Female; Humans; Male; Mouth, Edentulous
PubMed: 29071777
DOI: 10.1111/cid.12551 -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Oct 2018To analyze the available evidence in the English, German and Japanese literature on the survival and complications of natural teeth with cast copings used to retain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To analyze the available evidence in the English, German and Japanese literature on the survival and complications of natural teeth with cast copings used to retain overdentures (ROD).
STUDY SELECTION
A systematic search strategy was conducted using MeSH terms and pre-defined criteria. Two groups of researchers searched Pubmed, CENTRAL, Embase (English, German), Ichushi-web (Japanese) as well as hand searching. Data were extracted independently by the two groups. The estimated frequency of abutment tooth loss was calculated from data on the number of lost teeth and exposure time. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the annual frequency of abutment tooth loss across all included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 4791 eligible studies from PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL. An additional 316 articles were identified from the Ichushi-Web plus another 131 articles from additional sources. From those manuscripts, 19 reported relevant outcome data that was then extracted. The pooled data included a total of 1954 abutment teeth with a combined total exposure time of 9098 years. The estimated linear rate of loss was 1.76 %/year (95 %CI 1.13; 2.72). Caries and periodontal infections were identified as the most common reasons for abutment tooth loss.
CONCLUSIONS
Natural tooth retained overdentures often constitute the last resort before edentulism and might aid in this transition, especially in very old patients with reduced adaptive capacities. Given correct design, preparation and aftercare, RODs with cast copings, still are a valid treatment option in partially edentulous patients.
Topics: Databases, Bibliographic; Dental Abutments; Dental Casting Technique; Denture Retention; Denture, Overlay; Time Factors; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 29891420
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2018.05.002 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Dec 2023Adequate muscle activity is important for the success of oral rehabilitation: it maintains the integrity of the stomatognathic system and is responsible for chewing... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Adequate muscle activity is important for the success of oral rehabilitation: it maintains the integrity of the stomatognathic system and is responsible for chewing movements needed to break, crush and grind food.
OBJECTIVE
To compare muscle activity using electromyography (EMG) while clenching or chewing soft and/or hard foods among individuals with natural dentition (ND) and edentulous patients rehabilitated with dental prostheses.
METHODS
This review was conducted until March, 2023, and the research question was "Is the muscle activity of edentulous patients rehabilitated with dental prostheses similar to that of dentate individuals?" A search strategy was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Lilacs, Embase and manual journal searches.
RESULTS
Ten studies were included in the analysis. Most of them reported that individuals with ND had significant higher muscle activity (clenching or chewing) than complete dentures (CD) users. However, no difference was observed between patients with full mouth implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis (ISFDP) and ND. Additionally, two studies compared patients with mandibular ISFDP with maxillary CD and individuals with ND and found no differences; however, one study concluded that patients with ISFDP with CD (maxillary or mandibular) had lower muscle activity than individuals with ND. Only one study reported a higher muscle activity in patients with full-mouth ISFDP than in individuals with ND.
CONCLUSIONS
Bimaxillary CD users had lower muscle activity than individuals with ND. During rehabilitation, the muscle activity of patients with full-mouth ISFDP and mandibular ISFDP with maxillary CD is similar to individuals with ND.
Topics: Humans; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Mouth, Edentulous; Denture, Complete; Mastication; Muscles; Dental Implants; Denture, Overlay
PubMed: 37605296
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13564 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Feb 2024Evidence regarding the retention system for a mandibular overdenture is important for treatment planning. However, the clinical performance of stud and ball attachments... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Patient-reported outcome measures and clinical performance of implant-retained mandibular overdentures with stud and ball attachments: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Evidence regarding the retention system for a mandibular overdenture is important for treatment planning. However, the clinical performance of stud and ball attachments for mandibular overdenture retainers is unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical performance and self-reported patient outcomes of ball and stud attachments as mandibular overdenture retainers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Randomized (RCTs) and nonrandomized (N-RCTs) controlled clinical trials were selected based on the eligibility criteria. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration Tools, and the certainty of the evidence (COE) by using the grades of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) workshop approach. Meta-analyses according to the follow-up period were performed for implant survival, prosthetic maintenance and complications, bleeding on probing (BoP), marginal bone loss (MBL), satisfaction, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs and 4 N-RCTs were included. Twelve studies presented a high risk of bias. The stud demonstrated a lower risk ratio (RR) (P<.001) for maintenance and complications concerning the need for matrix activation (RR 7.12 [2.65, 19.15]) (very low COE) and new overdentures (RR 2.47 [1.02, 5.96]) (moderate COE), ranging from 1 to 5 years of follow-up. Mean difference (MD) for MBL after 1 (MD 0.40 [0.28, 0.52]; P<.001) and 5 years (MD 0.18 [0.16, 0.20]; P<.001) was higher for ball attachments than that for stud (very low COE) attachments. Stud attachments also improved satisfaction (P<.001) when compared with ball attachments (very low COE). Implant survival rate (high COE), BoP (very low COE), and OHRQoL (low COE) were similar for the attachments.
CONCLUSIONS
Stud and ball attachments are clinically appropriate options as mandibular overdenture retainers and are capable of restoring OHRQoL. Nevertheless, the stud showed greater improvement in satisfaction and less prosthetic aftercare and MBL.
Topics: Humans; Denture, Overlay; Quality of Life; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture Retention; Dental Implants; Mandible; Patient Reported Outcome Measures
PubMed: 35931572
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.02.006 -
Implant Dentistry Dec 2017The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) associated with an implant-supported overdenture (IOD) compared with a... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) associated with an implant-supported overdenture (IOD) compared with a conventional complete denture (CCD) in restoring the edentulous mandible.
METHODS
A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE (through Ovid), PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published between 1990 and July 2016. The search was restricted to articles published in English. Two reviewers selected the articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Another 2 reviewers analyzed the data.
RESULTS
From 108 articles that were obtained, 5 articles met the inclusion criteria. Four studies had a high risk of bias, and 1 study had an unclear risk of bias. There was a significant difference in Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) scores between pre- and post-treatment within the groups and in posttreatment OHIP scores between IOD and CCD groups.
CONCLUSION
Regarding the edentulous mandible, patients benefited more from the IOD with 2 implants, as determined by OHRQoL scores. Considering the differences between each domain of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire and the lack of long-term performance, more random control trials with sufficient sample sizes need to be designed to investigate long-term performance after treatment.
Topics: Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Complete; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Quality of Life
PubMed: 29189390
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000668 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Apr 2020This systematic review was undertaken to establish the most favourable protocol to treat an edentulous mandible with a single implant-retained overdenture. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
This systematic review was undertaken to establish the most favourable protocol to treat an edentulous mandible with a single implant-retained overdenture. The formulated PICO question was: "Which surgical and prosthetic protocols result in the highest survival and complication rates of implants and prostheses employed in a single implant retained overdenture for the rehabilitation of a completely edentulous mandibular ridge?"
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A structured literature search was conducted using the following databases; PubMed, ScienceDirect, COCHRANE, LILACS, IndeMED, OVID, EMBASE, NIH Clinical Trials for reports related to the single implant-retained overdenture treatment. Only English articles were included. Publications with a minimum follow up time of 1 year and above were included for meta-analysis. A Poisson regression model was applied to estimate the survival rates of the implant and prosthesis employed.
RESULTS
The electronic database search yielded 2083 titles and abstracts; and a total of 17 were selected for the systematic review, of which 11 studies were subjected to meta-analysis. The implants showed high estimated five and 10-year survival rates of 91.93% and 84.62%, respectively. Implants that were delayed loaded showed the greatest survival rates, while immediately loaded implants presented with higher survival rates at five (p = 0.849) and 10 years (p = 0.464) when compared to early loaded implants. The greatest number of fractures were associated with ball abutments with an event rate of 10.8 (95% CI: 10.5-11.09) per 100 prosthesis years, while locator abutments showed a greater number of maintenance events with an event rate of 16.84(95% CI:16.01-17.66) per 100 prosthesis years.
CONCLUSION
Single implant-retained overdenture treatment is a cost-effective, minimally invasive and simple treatment that can be used to restore function and aesthetics to edentulous patients, with relatively high implant and prosthesis success rates and minimal complications.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Overlay; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible
PubMed: 31849146
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13133 -
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of... Mar 2019The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of implant overdenture (IOD) bases and its cumulative...
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of implant overdenture (IOD) bases and its cumulative biological effect on the underlying supporting structures (implants and the residual ridge).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The required documents were collected electronically from PubMed and Web of Science databases targeting papers published in English that focused on denture base reinforcement for IOD prostheses in order to recognize the principal outcomes of reinforcement on the mechanical and biological properties of overdentures. Such biological outcomes as: strains on implants, peri-implant bone loss, residual ridge resorption, and strain on the residual alveolar ridge.
RESULTS
A total of 269 citations were identified. After excluding any repeated articles between databases and the application of exclusion and inclusion criteria, only 13 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Three publications investigated the mechanical properties of fibre and/or metal-reinforced implant overdentures while another 3 articles investigated the effect of metal reinforcement on stress distribution and strains transmitted to the underlying implants. In addition, 3 in vitro studies investigated the effect of metal reinforcement on overdenture base strain and stresses. Stress distribution to the residual ridge and strain characteristics of the underlying tissues were investigated by 2 in vitro studies. Five clinical studies performed to assist the clinical and prosthetic maintenance of metal-reinforced IOD were included. Data concerning denture base fracture, relining, peri-implant bone loss, probing depth, and implant survival rates during the functional period were extracted and considered in order to evaluate the mechanical properties of the denture base, residual ridge resorption and implant preservation rates, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The use of a denture base reinforcement can reduce the fracture incidence in IOD bases by enhancing their flexural properties and reducing the overdenture base deformation. Strains on the underlying supporting structures of overdenture prostheses including dental implants and the residual ridge can be decreased and evenly distributed using a metal reinforcement.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Dental Implants; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Mechanical Phenomena
PubMed: 30594062
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.12.006 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Dec 2022Healing abutments and attachments have been used for implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs). However, the effects of these abutments and attachments on... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Healing abutments and attachments have been used for implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs). However, the effects of these abutments and attachments on the clinical outcomes of the implants and prostheses are elusive because of the lack of standardized research protocols.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments and attachments by analyzing qualified studies.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic and manual literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases including articles published in English from 1980 to 2020. Publications of clinical outcome studies on the mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments or attachments were screened by inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical outcomes of removable partial dentures (RPDs) and ISRPDs with different types of abutments or attachments were compared by using patient-reported outcome measures, implant survival rate, masticatory performance, and implant- or prosthesis-related complications. Study designs and clinical outcome data were extracted and analyzed. The evidence of the selected studies and degree of recommendation were made according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, and the risk of bias of the studies was assessed based on Newcastle-Ottawa criteria.
RESULTS
Of 541 articles initially identified after removing duplicate records, 11 articles were selected by applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, by inter-viewer agreement, and by hand searching. Nine prospective cohort studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, and 1 randomized controlled trial were included with evidence levels assessed at 1b, 2b, and 2c. The risk of bias varied from 5 to 8 out of 9. Patient overall satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) scores, and masticatory ability were significantly improved for ISRPDs with either healing abutments, ball, or LOCATOR attachments when compared with RPDs. The implant survival rate varied from 92% to 97% at 2 to 10 years for ball attachment and was 100% at 1 year for LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs. Marginal bone loss (MBL) varied from 0 to 1 mm in all studies, although LOCATOR attachments had significantly less MBL compared with ball attachments. The maximal pocket depth and bleeding on probing index around implants at 1 year were 1.7 to 1.8 mm and 0.1 to 0.3. Loose healing caps were the main mechanical complication of implants. There were more prosthetic complications in ISRPDs with ball attachments than RPDs at 10-year follow-up, including gold matrix loosening, loss of retention, and denture base fractures. No direct comparisons were made of patient-reported outcomes or prosthetic complications between ball and LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs.
CONCLUSIONS
Healing abutments and attachments (ball or LOCATOR) improved patient-reported outcomes and the masticatory function of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. However, insufficient evidence was found to determine the relative effectiveness of different attachment systems on the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. Abutment loosening was the most frequent mechanical complication for healing abutments. More prosthetic complications were associated with ball attachment-supported ISRPDs than RPDs. The major weaknesses of this systematic review were the relatively moderate level of evidence and the publication language, since implant attachments are used in many non-English speaking countries.
Topics: Humans; Denture, Partial, Removable; Denture Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Implants; Quality of Life; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Mandible; Denture, Overlay
PubMed: 34301416
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.008 -
Journal of Applied Oral Science :... 2023Currently, there is no consensus on the indications and clinical performance of implant-supported overdentures (IODs) involving computer-aided design and manufacturing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
UNLABELLED
Currently, there is no consensus on the indications and clinical performance of implant-supported overdentures (IODs) involving computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) bars.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the performance of IODs involving CAD-CAM bars.
METHODOLOGY
A comprehensive search of studies published until May 2023 was conducted in many databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and SciELO, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question was: "How do IODs retained by bars fabricated by CAD-CAM technology perform in daily clinical practice?" The meta-analysis included clinical studies based on effect size and a two-tailed null test with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, nine reported a 100% implant survival rate for all CAD-CAM milled bars. Complications were reported in two studies with CAD/CAM-milled titanium bars, and one study reported more fractures in soldered gold bars used in maxillary rehabilitation. However, no fractures were observed in IODs retained by PEEK and zirconia bars. According to six studies, biological complications, including peri-implantitis, were minimal in the BioHPP and PEEK bar groups, while no cases were reported in the titanium or zirconia bar groups. CAD-CAM-milled zirconia bars had higher plaque and bleeding indices compared with titanium bars, as evidenced by findings from five studies. All four studies that evaluated Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) scores showed a positive effect of IODs retained by CAD-CAM milled titanium bars on quality of life. Patient satisfaction and acceptance by prosthodontists were significantly high, according to the results of five studies.
CONCLUSION
Overdentures retained with CAD-CAM milled titanium bars show great potential for use in daily clinical practice. Moreover, patient and practitioner satisfaction was very high when this method was used.
Topics: Humans; Denture, Overlay; Quality of Life; Titanium; Computer-Aided Design
PubMed: 37646715
DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2023-0054