The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제7권4호
  • /
  • Pages.338-342
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Implant-supported overdentures with different bar designs: A retrospective evaluation after 5-19 years of clinical function

  • 투고 : 2015.03.25
  • 심사 : 2015.08.05
  • 발행 : 2015.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. This retrospective study evaluated the outcome of implant-retained overdentures (IODs) after 5-19 years of clinical function. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective analysis of patient files was performed referring to 27 patients who received 36 IODs with 3 different bar designs (group A=prefabricated round bars, n=7; group B=one-piece anterior milled bars, n=20; and group C=two bilaterally placed milled bars, n=9) in the mandible (n=24) and/or in the maxilla (n=12). The analysis focused on the survival and success rates (according to Kaplan-Meier) of the implants and prostheses. Technical complication rates for each type of restoration were analyzed and compared via one-way ANOVA and the Chi-squared test. The prevalence of peri-implantitis (radiographic bone loss ${\geq}3.5mm$) was evaluated by digital analysis of panoramic radiographs taken postoperative (baseline) and after 5-19 years of clinical function (follow-up). RESULTS. The mean observational time was 7.3 years. The survival rates of the prostheses and implants were 100% and 97.7%, respectively. Technical complications occurred more frequently in group A (mean: 3.5 during observational time) than in the other two groups (B: 0.8; C: 1.0). However, this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.58). Peri-implantitis was diagnosed for 12.4% of the implants in 37% of the patients. CONCLUSION. Bar-retained IODs are an adequate treatment option for edentulous jaws. These restorations may exhibit high implant/prosthesis survival rates (>97%), and a limited incidence of technical complications after a mean observational period of >7 years. Nevertheless, peri-implantitis was identified as a frequent and serious biological complication for this type of reconstruction.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Krennmair G, Krainhofner M, Piehslinger E. The influence of bar design (round versus milled bar) on prosthodontic maintenance of mandibular overdentures supported by 4 implants: a 5-year prospective study. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21: 514-20.
  2. Krennmair G, Piehslinger E. Removable implant-supported maxillary prostheses anchored on milled bars: a retrospective evaluation of two concepts. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:576-8.
  3. Andreiotelli M, Att W, Strub JR. Prosthodontic complications with implant overdentures: a systematic literature review. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:195-203.
  4. Brosky ME, Korioth TW, Hodges J. The anterior cantilever in the implant-supported screw-retained mandibular prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:244-9. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2003.43
  5. Krennmair G, Krainhofner M, Piehslinger E. Implantsupported mandibular overdentures retained with a milled bar: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:987-94.
  6. Krennmair G, Suto D, Seemann R, Piehslinger E. Removable four implant-supported mandibular overdentures rigidly retained with telescopic crowns or milled bars: a 3-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:481-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02169.x
  7. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RH, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:722-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x
  8. Ueda T, Kremer U, Katsoulis J, Mericske-Stern R. Long-term results of mandibular implants supporting an overdenture: implant survival, failures, and crestal bone level changes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:365-72.
  9. Rinke S, Roediger M, Eickholz P, Lange K, Ziebolz D. Technical and biological complications of single-molar implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:1024-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12382
  10. Frisch E, Ziebolz D, Ratka-Kruger P, Rinke S. Double crown-retained maxillary overdentures: 5-year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17:22-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12087
  11. Abd El-Dayem MA, Assad AS, Eldin Sanad ME, Mahmoud Mogahed SA. Comparison of prefabricated and custommade bars used for implant-retained mandibular complete overdentures. Implant Dent 2009;18:501-11. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181b4f857
  12. Cehreli MC, Karasoy D, Kokat AM, Akca K, Eckert S. A systematic review of marginal bone loss around implants retaining or supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:266-77.
  13. Rinke S, Ohl S, Ziebolz D, Lange K, Eickholz P. Prevalence of periimplant disease in partially edentulous patients: a practice-based cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22:826-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02061.x
  14. Bressan E, Tomasi C, Stellini E, Sivolella S, Favero G, Berglundh T. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:814-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02225.x
  15. Heschl A, Payer M, Clar V, Stopper M, Wegscheider W, Lorenzoni M. Overdentures in the edentulous mandible supported by implants and retained by a Dolder bar: a 5-year prospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013;15:589-99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00380.x

피인용 문헌

  1. The novel use of inter-maxillary fixation screws as denture abutments in a Parkinson's patient vol.10, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/ors.12237
  2. Peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis: Case definitions and diagnostic considerations vol.89, pp.00223492, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.17-0588
  3. Peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis: Case definitions and diagnostic considerations vol.45, pp.03036979, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12956
  4. Precision of the milled full-arch framework fabricated using pre-sintered soft alloy: A pilot study vol.10, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.2.128
  5. Locator® versus ceramic/electroplated double-crown attachments: a prospective study on the intraindividual comparison of implant-supported mandibular prostheses pp.1436-3771, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2491-1
  6. Rehabilitation of an Extremely Edentulous Atrophic Maxilla with a Pseudoskeletal Class III Relationship vol.2019, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5696837
  7. Implant-supported overdentures with different clinical configurations: Mechanical resistance using a numerical approach vol.121, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.09.023
  8. Surface Roughness and Necessity of Manual Refinishing Requirements of CAD/CAM-Manufactured Titanium and Cobalt-Chrome Bars - A Pilot Study vol.13, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601913010316
  9. Patient compliance as a risk factor for the outcome of implant treatment vol.81, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12293
  10. Oberflächengüte von CAD/CAM-gefrästen Implantatstegen aus Titan und Kobalt-Chrom vol.129, pp.11, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1277-2646
  11. Realization of a Dental Framework by 3D Printing in Material Cobalt-Chromium with Superior Precision and Fitting Accuracy vol.13, pp.23, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13235390