The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제7권4호
  • /
  • Pages.303-311
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of changes in retentive force of three stud attachments for implant overdentures

  • Kim, Su-Min (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Choi, Jae-Won (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Jeon, Young-Chan (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Jeong, Chang-Mo (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Yun, Mi-Jung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Lee, So-Hyoun (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Huh, Jung-Bo (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 투고 : 2015.01.07
  • 심사 : 2015.05.12
  • 발행 : 2015.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to compare the changes in retentive force of stud attachments for implant overdentures by in vitro 2-year-wear simulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three commercially available attachment systems were investigated: Kerator blue, O-ring red, and EZ lock. Two implant fixtures were embedded in parallel in each custom base mounting. Five pairs of each attachment system were tested. A universal testing machine was used to measure the retentive force during 2500 insertion and removal cycles. Surface changes on the components were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). A Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Pairwise comparison, was used to compare the retentive force between the groups, and to determine groups that were significantly different (${\alpha}$<.05). RESULTS. A comparison of the initial retentive force revealed the highest value for Kerator, followed by the O-ring and EZ lock attachments. However, no significant difference was detected between Kerator and O-ring (P>.05). After 2500 insertion and removal cycles, the highest retention loss was recorded for O-ring, and no significant difference between Kerator and EZ lock (P>.05). Also, Kerator showed the highest retentive force, followed by EZ lock and O-ring, after 2500 cycles (P<.05). Based on SEM analysis, the polymeric components in O-ring and Kerator were observed to exhibit surface wear and deformation. CONCLUSION. After 2500 insertion and removal cycles, all attachments exhibited significant loss in retention. Mechanism of retention loss can only be partially explained by surface changes.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Gunne HS, Bergman B, Enbom L, Hogstrom J. Masticatory efficiency of complete denture patients. A clinical examination of potential changes at the transition from old to new denture. Acta Odontol Scand 1982;40:289-97. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016358209024072
  2. Bergman B, Carlsson GE. Clinical long-term study of complete denture wearers. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:56-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90066-6
  3. van Waas MA. The influence of clinical variables on patients' satisfaction with complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63: 307-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90202-N
  4. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. A review of clinical and technical considerations for fixed and removable implant prostheses in the edentulous mandible. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15: 65-72.
  5. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Branemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
  6. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  7. Petropoulos VC, Smith W. Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:526-35.
  8. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry, 2nd ed. Missouri; CV Mosby; 1999. p. 67-72.
  9. Caldwell CW, Clark AE. Dental implant prosthodontics, eds. Philadelphia; JB Lipponeott Co.; 1991. p. 313.
  10. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, Head T, Lund JP, MacEntee M, Mericske-Stern R, Mojon P, Morais J, Naert I, Payne AG, Penrod J, Stoker GT, Tawse-Smith A, Taylor TD, Thomason JM, Thomson WM, Wismeijer D. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Montreal, Quebec, May 24-25, 2002. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:601-2.
  11. Haraldson T, Jemt T, Stalblad PA, Lekholm U. Oral function in subjects with overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Scand J Dent Res 1988;96:235-42.
  12. Melas F, Marcenes W, Wright PS. Oral health impact on daily performance in patients with implant-stabilized overdentures and patients with conventional complete dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:700-12.
  13. Davis DM. Role of implants in the treatment of edentulous patients. Int J Prosthodont 1990;3:42-50.
  14. Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, van't Hof M, Stegenga B, Vissink A. A randomized prospective clinical trial on the effectiveness of three treatment modalities for patients with lower denture problems. A 10 year follow-up study on patient satisfaction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;32:498-503.
  15. Trakas T, Michalakis K, Kang K, Hirayama H. Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent 2006;15:24-34. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.id.0000202419.21665.36
  16. Naert I, Gizani S, Vuylsteke M, van Steenberghe D. A 5-year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: Peri-implant outcome. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9: 170-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x
  17. van Kampen F, Cune M, van der Bilt A, Bosman F. Retention and postinsertion maintenance of bar-clip, ball and magnet attachments in mandibular implant overdenture treatment: an in vivo comparison after 3 months of function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:720-6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00961.x
  18. Cardoso RC, Gerngross PJ, Dominici JT, Kiat-amnuay S. Survey of currently selected dental implants and restorations by prosthodontists. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28: 1017-25. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2855
  19. Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JY. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:121-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00212-9
  20. Walton JN, Ruse ND. In vitro changes in clips and bars used to retain implant overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:482-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80349-X
  21. Besimo CH1, Graber G, Fluhler M. Retention force changes in implant-supported titanium telescope crowns over longterm use in vitro. J Oral Rehabil 1996;23:372-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1996.tb00866.x
  22. Wichmann MG, Kuntze W. Wear behavior of precision attachments. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12:409-14.
  23. Bayer S, Steinheuser D, Gruner M, Keilig L, Enkling N, Stark H, Mues S. Comparative study of four retentive anchor systems for implant supported overdentures--retention force changes. Gerodontology 2009;26:268-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2009.00286.x
  24. Alsabeeha NH, Payne AG, Swain MV. Attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: a review of in vitro investigations on retention and wear features. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:429-40.
  25. Sinclair PM, Little RM. Maturation of untreated normal occlusions. Am J Orthod 1983;83:114-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(83)90296-8
  26. Stephens GJ, di Vitale N, O'Sullivan E, McDonald A. The influence of interimplant divergence on the retention characteristics of locator attachments, a laboratory study. J Prosthodont 2014;23:467-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12144
  27. Lehmann KM, Arnim FV. Studies on the retention forces of snap-on attachments. Quintes Dent Technol 1978;7:45-8.
  28. Setz I, Lee SH, Engel E. Retention of prefabricated attachments for implant stabilized overdentures in the edentulous mandible: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:323-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70133-7
  29. Pigozzo MN, Mesquita MF, Henriques GE, Vaz LG. The service life of implant-retained overdenture attachment systems. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:74-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60112-8
  30. Alsabeeha NH, Swain MV, Payne AG. Clinical performance and material properties of single-implant overdenture attachment systems. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:247-54.
  31. Rutkunas V, Mizutani H, Takahashi H, Iwasaki N. Wear simulation effects on overdenture stud attachments. Dent Mater J 2011 Nov 25.
  32. Schallamach A. A theory of dynamic rubber friction. Wear 1963;6:375-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(63)90206-0
  33. Nagaoka E, Nagayasu Y, Yamashita H, Matsushiro H, Okuno Y. Study of retention in attachments for overdenture. (II) O-ring attachment. J Osaka Univ Dent Sch 1980;20:215-26.
  34. Gent AN, Pulford CTR. Wear of metal by rubber. J Mater Sci 1979;14:1301-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00549301
  35. Winkler S, Piermatti J, Rothman A, Siamos G. An overview of the O-ring implant overdenture attachment: clinical reports. J Oral Implantol 2002;28:82-6. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2002)028<0082:AOOTOI>2.3.CO;2
  36. Gamborena JI, Hazelton LR, NaBadalung D, Brudvik J. Retention of ERA direct overdenture attachments before and after fatigue loading. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:123-30.
  37. Mezger PR, Creugers NH. Titanium nitride coatings in clinical dentistry. J Dent 1992;20:342-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(92)90021-4
  38. Halling J. Introduction to Tribology, 5th ed. London; Wykham Publications; 1976. p. 63-82.
  39. Williams BH, Ochiai KT, Hojo S, Nishimura R, Caputo AA. Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:603-7. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.120838

피인용 문헌

  1. Effect of Cyclic Dislodging on the Retention of Two Attachment Systems for Implant-supported Overdentures: An In Vitro Study vol.19, pp.11, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2437
  2. In vitro Effects of Cyclic Dislodgement on Retentive Properties of Various Titanium-Based Dental Implant Overdentures Attachment System vol.12, pp.22, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12223770
  3. 임플란트 bar 어태치먼트에 사용하는 두 가지 부가적인 유지장 치의 유지력 특성 비교 vol.59, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2021.59.2.173