• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.91-104
• /
• 2008

Recently, osseointegrated implants have been used to improve denture support, stability, and retention. Several studies have been revealed that mandibular two-implant overdentures significantly increase patient satisfaction with the function of their prostheses. Use of a wide variety of attachment systems, including stud, magnet, and bar attachments, has proven both clinically predictable and effective. This article presents that two-implant overdenture can become the standard of care for treatment of the edentulous mandible.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.54 no.3
• /
• pp.267-272
• /
• 2016

This case report describes the treatment of two fully edentulous patients with mini-implant overdentures using different implant systems on narrow mandibular alveolar bone ridge. They were complaining about discomfort and pain wearing mandibular conventional complete dentures caused by insufficient retention. Each patient received four miniimplants in the interforaminal area of the mandible using the non-submerged flapless surgical approach. One-body type implant (Slimline, Dentium, Seoul, Korea) was used for a patient and loaded immediately after surgery. Metal housings of O-ring were attached by direct technique. For the other patient, two-piece type implant (LODI, Zest Anchors, Escondido, CA, USA) was used and impressions were made for attachment connection of the Locator's metal housings after 8 weeks of surgery. Within this case report, mandibular miniimplant overdentures using different implant systems showed improvement of patient satisfaction with favorable peri-implant tissue response 6 months after attachment connection. However, long-term follow-up is needed for further evaluation.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.375-390
• /
• 2009

Statement of problem: Implant supported overdenture is accepted widely as a way to restore edentulous ridge providing better retention and support of dentures. Various types of attachment for overdenture have been developed. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of attachment type in implant overdentures on the biomechanical stress distribution in the surrounding bone, prosthesis and interface between implant and bone. Material and methods: Finite element analysis method was used. Average CT image of mandibular body(Digital $Korea^{(R)}$, KISTI, Korea) was used to produce a mandibular model. Overdentures were placed instead of mandibular teeth and 2mm of mucosa was inserted between the overdenture and mandible. Two implants($USII^{(R)}$, Osstem, Korea) were placed at both cuspid area and 4 types of overdenture were fabricated ; ball and socket, Locator, magnet and bar type. Load was applied on the from second premolar to second molar tooth area. 6 times of finite element analyses were performed according to the direction of the force $90^{\circ}$, $45^{\circ}$, $0^{\circ}$ and unilateral or bilateral force applied. The stress at interface between implants and bone, and prosthesis and the bone around implants ware compared using von Mises stress. The results were explained with color coded graphs based on the equivalent stress to distinguish the force distribution pattern and the site of maximum stress concentration. Results: Unilateral loading showed that connection area between implant fixture and bar generated maximum stress in bar type overdentures. Bar type produced 100 Mpa which means the most among 4 types of attachments. Bilateral loading, however, showed that bar type was more stable than other implants(magnet, ball and socket). 26 Mpa of bar type was about a half of other types on overdenture under $90^{\circ}$ bilateral loading. Conclusions: In any directions of stress, bar type was proved to be the most vulnerable type in both implants and overdentures. Interface stress did not show any significant difference in stress distribution pattern.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.59 no.1
• /
• pp.88-96
• /
• 2021

Fixed implant prostheses or removable partial dentures are common treatment for partially dentulous patients. Recently, an implant-assisted removable partial denture (IARPD) has been introduced and is widely used. In the case of removable partial dentures using implant attachment and surveyed fixed prostheses, the consideration about parallelism of insertion path between implants and surveyed fixed prostheses is an important factor for success of IARPDs. In this case, she complained of discomfort while using the mandibular removable partial denture. Thus, an IARPD using implant surveyed fixed prostheses was fabricated. Thereafter, more implants were placed by a digital guide surgery to have the same insertion path as the existing surveyed fixed prostheses. Locator attachments were installed to the left and right premolar implants, and the left molar was able to obtain support of the removable partial denture with healing abutment. The clinical results were satisfactory on the aspect of aesthetic and masticatory function.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.54 no.1
• /
• pp.41-48
• /
• 2016

Edentulous patients with severe alveolar bone resorption have trouble with using traditional complete denture. In order to overcome these problems, implant-retained overdenture was developed. SFI-bar$^{(R)}$ system can save time and cost compared to other existing bar systems which need complicated laboratory procedures because it can be adjusted directly in a patient's mouth. A 55-year-old male, who had experienced a fractured lower old implant-retained overdenture, wanted a durable and painless denture. The fractured Locator$^{(R)}$ attachments were removed and edentulous mandible was restored with SFI-bar$^{(R)}$. A 77-year-old female with a medical history of the Parkinson's disease and severely absorbed alveolar bone of mandible, wanted to wear a retentive mandibular denture without pain. After placing two implants in front of mental foramen, two adaptors were connected to two implants and a tube bar was connected to the adaptors. A female part fitted to the bar was attached to the new denture. These clinical reports describe two-implant-retained overdenture using the SFI-bar$^{(R)}$ system in mandibular edentulous patients. Since the patients were satisfied esthetically and functionally during 2 years' observation, we would like to report cases.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.314-321
• /
• 2016

Conventional removable partial dentures (RPDs) with distal extensions are associated with some problems, including lack of stability that calls for frequent relining, and cantilever actions of claps that can produce excessive loading to abutment teeth, and the need for unesthetic retentive arm clasps. Therefore, IARPDs (Implant-assisted RPD) that use implants to support or retain RPDs has been reported to improve stability, esthetics and masticatory performance of RPDs. Also, an IARPD that has zirconia occlusal table can prevent the incongruity of occlusal plane and the extrusion of antagonistic tooth. In this case of partially edentulous patient with crossed occlusion, each edentulous area was restored with implant fixed prosthesis and implant retained partial denture to suit each situation. Through the procedure, satisfactory outcomes were achieved both in functional and esthetic aspects.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.62 no.2
• /
• pp.123-130
• /
• 2024

There are various methods for restoring the dentition of completely edentulous patients. Removable complete dentures have the advantage of being relatively economical, but they can be uncomfortable to wear. With the introduction of implant prosthodontics, various options such as implant-supported overdentures and hybrid prostheses have become available. If there is inadequate remaining ridge or limited financial resources, an overdenture supported by a few implants with additional attachments may be more suitable. In this case, due to severe peri-implantitis and other complications, the implants were removed. Subsequently, four implants (two on each side) were placed in the maxilla and a milled-bar with attachment was fabricated for each side of the maxilla.