BACKGROUND: Literature lacks information on various unsplinted attachment systems and their effect on peri-implant tissue health. A focus question (as per PICOS) was set as follows: Does one particular unsplinted attachment system (I) compared with another (C) results in better peri-implant outcomes (O) in two implant-retained mandibular overdentures (P) using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (S)? The literature search was conducted in the PubMed, MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases between January 2011 and December 2021. The keywords used were "denture, overlay," "denture," "overlay" AND "dental prosthesis, implant supported," "dental implants," "dental implant abutment design" AND "jaw, edentulous," "mouth, edentulous" AND "mandible." Only RCTs on two implant-retained mandibular overdentures using unsplinted attachment systems measuring peri-implant tissue outcomes with minimum 1-year follow-up were selected. In total, 224 studies were identified in initial search, and 25 were shortlisted for full-text evaluation. Four studies were included for systematic review upon considering inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 (RoB 2.0).
REVIEW RESULTS: A total of 41 patients received ball attachments (in 3 studies), 36 patients received low-profile attachments (in 3 studies), 16 patients received magnet attachments (in 1 study), and 13 patients received telescopic attachments (in 1 study). All four studies used standard sized implants, however, differed in implant manufacturers. Two studies which compared ball attachments low-profile attachments revealed-similar peri-implant tissue health parameters but differed in crestal bone-level changes. One study compared ball with telescopic attachments and revealed similar results in crestal bone-level changes and all four peri-implant tissue health parameters. Single study compared magnets with low-profile attachments and shown lesser bone loss with magnet attachments. Single study was judged to have low risk of bias, single with some concerns, and remaining two to have high risk of bias.
CONCLUSION: Gingival index and bleeding index of the patients were not influenced by any of the unsplinted overdenture attachment (stud, magnet, telescopic) system. Inconclusive results found among the studies evaluated comparing crestal bone loss and plaque index.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This review manuscript has simplified comparative analysis of different unsplinted attachment systems used in two implant mandibular overdentures to help clinicians choose correct system in such situation.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate crest bone-level changes and patient satisfaction with mandibular overdentures retained by 1 or 2 titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr) implants with immediate loading protocols after 1 year.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-six Ti-Zr implants were placed in 24 participants (single central implant in 12 participants and 2 interforaminal implants in 11 participants) by a single operator. LOCATOR attachments were used to retain the mandibular overdentures with an immediate loading protocol, and observations were made at 1 month and 1 year. Changes to the crestal bone level were evaluated with digital periapical radiographs. A 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) was used to evaluate patient satisfaction. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: At 1 month, the mean crestal bone loss was 0.23 mm in the 2-implant group (n=22) and 0.39 mm (P=.181) in the single-implant group (n=11). At 1 year, the bone loss was 0.67 mm in the 2-implant group and 0.88 mm (P=.248) in the single-implant group. The mean VAS score for patient satisfaction level increased from 38.3% to 49.7% for single-implant participants and from 40.5% to 54.8% for 2-implant participants 1 month after implant placement (P=.250) and from 38.3% to 54.5% for single-implant participants and from 40.5% to 58.9% for 2-implant participants after 1 year (P=.341).
CONCLUSIONS: Single-implant-retained mandibular overdentures with an immediate loading protocol may represent a viable treatment option considering crestal bone-level changes and patient satisfaction compared with 2-implant-retained mandibular overdentures after 1 year of follow-up.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this finite element analysis study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior (stress distribution pattern) in the mandibular overdenture, mucosa, bone, and implants when retained with 2 standard implants or 2 mini implants under unilateral or bilateral loading conditions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A patient with edentulous mandible and his denture was scanned with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), and a 3D mandibular model was created in the Mimics software program by using the CBCT digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) images. The model was transferred to the 3Matics software program to form a 2-mm-thick mucosal layer and to assemble the denture DICOM file. A 12-mm-long standard implant (Ø3.5 mm) and a mini dental implant (Ø2.5 mm) along with the LOCATOR male attachments (height 4 mm) were designed by using the SOLIDWORKS software program. Two standard or 2 mini implants in the canine region were embedded separately in the 3D assembled model. The base of the mandible was fixed, and vertical compressive loads of 100 N were applied unilaterally and bilaterally in the first molar region. The material properties for acrylic resin (denture), titanium (implants), mucosa (tissue), and bone (mandible) were allocated. Maximum von Mises stress and strain values were obtained and analyzed.
RESULTS: Maximum stresses of 9.78 MPa (bilaterally) and 11.98 MPa (unilaterally) were observed in 2 mini implants as compared with 3.12 MPa (bilaterally) and 3.81 MPa (unilaterally) in 2 standard implants. The stress values in the mandible were observed to be almost double the mini implants as compared with the standard implants. The stresses in the denture were in the range of 3.21 MPa and 3.83 MPa and in the mucosa of 0.68 MPa and 0.7 MPa for 2 implants under unilateral and bilateral loading conditions. The strain values shown similar trends with both implant types under bilateral and unilateral loading.
CONCLUSIONS: Two mini implants generated an average of 68.15% more stress than standard implants. The 2 standard implant-retained overdenture showed less stress concentration in and around implants than mini implant-retained overdentures.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the changes in masticatory function from baseline (T0) to 3 months (T1) and 3 years (T2) in participants with MODs and to assess the effect of baseline mandibular bone height and volume on masticatory function after 3 years.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants were assessed for masticatory function by using masticatory performance involving paraffin wax cubes as an objective measure and by using masticatory ability involving a questionnaire as a subjective measure. Edentulous individuals presenting for replacement dentures were provided with conventional mucosa-supported prostheses and evaluated for masticatory function after a 3-month settling-in period (baseline measure). Before implant placement, baseline measures of bone height and volume were recorded from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. The prostheses were then converted to implant-stabilized mandibular overdentures while any maxillary prostheses remained supported by the mucosa. Masticatory function was reassessed at 3 months and 3 years after insertion of the mandibular overdentures, and the mean changes from baseline were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The effect of variables on masticatory function was determined by using multivariate linear regression analyses.
RESULTS: A total of 23 participants were included in the study, with only 1 participant not completing the 3-year assessment. Significant improvement was observed in the masticatory performance (mixing ability index) (Pimplant-stabilized mandibular overdenture.
CONCLUSIONS: Masticatory function significantly improved after 3 months and was maintained over 3 years in participants with implant-stabilized mandibular overdentures. However, baseline bone height and volume had no significant effect on these changes in masticatory function after 3 years.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the crestal strain around 2 implants to support mandibular overdentures when placed at different positions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Edentulous mandibles were 3-dimensionally (3D) designed separately with 2 holes for implant placement at similar distances of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mm from the midline, resulting in 4 study conditions. The complete denture models were 3D designed and printed from digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) images after scanning the patient's denture. Two 4.3×12-mm dummy implants were placed in the preplanned holes. Two linear strain gauges were attached on the crest of the mesial and distal side of each implant (CH1, CH2, CH3, and CH4) and connected to a computer to record the electrical signals. Male LOCATOR attachments were attached, the mucosal layer simulated, and the denture picked up with pink female nylon caps. A unilateral and bilateral force of 100 N was maintained for 10 seconds for each model in a universal testing machine while recording the maximum strains in the DCS-100A KYOWA computer software program. Data were analyzed by using 1-way analysis of variance, the Tukey post hoc test, and the paired t test (α=.05).
RESULTS: Under bilateral loading, the strain values indicated a trend with increasing distance between the implants with both right and left distal strain gauges (CH4 and CH1). The negative (-ve) values indicated the compressive force, and the positive (+ve) values indicated the tensile force being applied on the strain gauges. The strain values for CH4 ranged between -166.08 for the 5-mm and -251.58 for the 20-mm position; and for CH1 between -168.08 for the 5-mm and -297.83 for the 20-mm position. The remaining 2 mesial strain gauges for all 4 implant positions remained lower than for CH4 and CH1. Under unilateral-right loading, only the right-side distal strain gauge CH4 indicated the increasing trend in the strain values with -147.5 for the 5-mm, -157.17 for the 10-mm, -209.33 for the 15-mm, and -234.75 for the 20 mm position. The remaining 3 strain gauges CH3, CH2, and CH1 ranged between -28.33 and -107.17. For each position for both implants, significantly higher (Pimplant crestal strains in the 2IMO increased by increasing the distance of the implants from the midline. The stress values progressively increased from 5 to 10 mm to 15 to 20 mm from midline, represented as lateral incisor, canine, and premolar positions. The distal side of the implants exhibits higher strains than the mesial side of the implants.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this 3D finite element analysis study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of 2-implant mandibular overdentures (2IMO) and their individual components by using implants of different diameters.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 3D mandibular model was obtained from the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of a 59-year-old edentulous man, and a 3D denture model was developed from intraoral scanning files in the Mimics software program. A 3D model of different diameters of implants (2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4.0 mm) with a LOCATOR attachment was developed in the Solidworks software program. Two same-sized implants were inserted in the mandibular model at 10 mm from the midline in the 3Matics software program. A vertical load of 100 N was applied on the first molar region on the right side or both sides in the ANSYS software program. The maximum von Mises stresses and strains were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS: Stresses within the implants decreased with an increase in diameter (from 2.5 mm to 3 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4.0 mm) of the implants. The highest stresses were observed with 2.5-mm-diameter implants (0.949 MPa under unilateral and 0.915 MPa under bilateral loading) and the lowest with Ø4-mm implants (0.710 MPa under unilateral and 0.703 MPa under bilateral loading). The strains on the implants ranged between 0.0000056 and 0.0000097, and those on the mandible ranged between 0.0000513 and 0.0000566 across all diameters of the implants without following a specific trend.
CONCLUSIONS: In 2IMO, the stresses in the implants and mandible decreased with an increase in the diameter of the implants. The implants of lesser diameter (2.5 mm) exhibited the highest stresses and strains, and the implants of the largest diameter (4 mm) exhibited the lowest stresses and strains under unilateral and bilateral loading conditions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional solid models of the maxilla, mucosa, and denture of a selected edentulous patient were created using Mimics and CATIA software. The FEA model was created and duplicated in ANSYS 16.0 to perform two simulations for the IOD and the CD models. The values of maximum stress and strain and total deformation were obtained and compared to the outcomes of premaxilla resorption from a parallel clinical study.
RESULTS: The maximum principal stress in the premaxilla in the IOD model ranged from 0.019 to 0.336 MPa, while it ranged from 0.011 to 0.193 MPa in the CD model. The maximum principal strain in the IOD model was 1.75 times greater than that in the CD model. Total deformation was 1.8 times higher in the IOD model. Greater bone resorption was observed in regions of higher stress, which were on the occlusal and buccal sides of the premaxilla residual ridge.
CONCLUSION: Stress, strain, and total deformation values present in the premaxilla area beneath a CD were approximately two times greater in a comparison between an opposing mandibular two-IOD and an opposing mandibular CD. The results were consistent with a parallel clinical study in which the rate of premaxilla bone resorption was almost three times greater in the IOD group.