Open Access, Peer-reviewed, Quarterly
pISSN 0301-2875
eISSN 2005-3789
    J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2011 Oct;49(4):283-290. Korean.
    Published online Oct 31, 2011.
    https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2011.49.4.283
    Copyright © 2011 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    Original Article

    Clinical evaluation of implant retained overdentures using two implant and Locator attachments in the fully edentulous mandibles

    Ju-Hyoung Lee, DDS and Dong-Seok Sohn, DDS, PhD
      • Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.
    • Corresponding Author: Dong-Seok Sohn. Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, 3056-6 Daemyung 4-dong, Nam-gu, Daegu, 705-718, Korea. +82 53 650 4291: Email: dssohn@cu.ac.kr
    Received July 21, 2011; Revised October 06, 2011; Accepted October 17, 2011.

    Abstract

    Purpose

    This study compared the marginal bone loss around dental implant that were placed in the canine areas of the mandibles and finded the survival rate of implants, marginal bone loss around implants and prosthetic complications in 10 patients treated with overdentures retained with Locator attachments.

    Materials and methods

    Ten patients who had received implant retained overdentures in the mandibules using two implants and Locator attachments at Daegu Catholic University Medical Center from 2004 to 2010 were included in this study. Evaluations of the survival rate of implants, marginal bone loss and prosthetic complications were performed.

    Results

    Implants placed in this study showed a 100% survival rate and the average annual bone loss was 1.03 mm ± 0.20 mm in the first year. The patients have verbally indicated that they are comfortable and that their overdentures function well. But, implant retained overdentures had various prosthetic complications such as male change, relining, rebasing and denture fracture.

    Conclusion

    Implant retained overdentures using two implant and Locator attachments in the fully edentulous mandibles is considered as a stable way for long terms because of minimal invasive operation, simple prosthetic process and easy repair.

    Keywords
    Mandible; Implant retained overdenture; Locator attachment; Marginal bone loss around implant; Prosthetic complication

    Figures

    Fig. 1
    Two implants were placed in anterior mandible. 4 mini implants were placed simultaneously for immediate loading. Note bone defect around at the #43 implant.

    Fig. 2
    Mineral allograft was grafted in the bone defect and collagen membrane was covered over the bone.

    Fig. 3
    Postoperative panoramic radiogram.

    Fig. 4
    A: Fixed provisional restoration was delivered after the stitch-out, B: Lacator attachment was seated on the implant with torque of 30 Ncm after 8 months healing period. Mini implants were removed out when final denture was delivered.

    Fig. 5
    Periapical radiograms after delivery of final denture, B: Periapical radiograms after 6.5 years show minimal bone loss around implants.

    Fig. 6
    References used to measure actual marginal bone loss. a: The distance from top level of implant platform to implant apex. b: The distance from top level of implant platform to marginal bone contact level.

    Tables

    Table 1
    Datum of patients and implants

    Table 2
    Number of implants placed according to implant length and diameter

    Table 3
    Life table analysis of cumulative survival rate after the insertion

    Table 4
    Marginal bone loss at the first year

    Table 5
    Prosthetic complications

    References

      1. Mericske-Stern RD, Taylor TD, Belser U. Management of the edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:108–125.
      1. Naert I, Gizani S, Vuylsteke M, Van Steenberghe D. A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:195–202.
      1. Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, Stegenga B, van't Hof MA, van Oort RP, Vissink A. Effectiveness of three treatment modalities for the edentulous mandible. A five-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:195–201.
      1. Thomason JM. The McGill Consensus Statement on Overdentures. Mandibular 2-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2002;10:95–96.
      1. Mericske-Stern R, Steinlin ST, Marti P, Geering AH. Peri-implant mucosal aspects of ITI implants supporting overdentures. A five-year longitudinal study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1994;5:9–18.
      1. Kim SO. In: Implant Overdenture. Seoul: Myungmoon Publishing; 2007. pp. 115-118.
      1. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161–172.
      1. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387–416.
      1. Cox JF, Zarb GA. The longitudinal clinical efficacy of osseointegrated dental implants: a 3-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:91–100.
      1. van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Calberson L, Demanet M. A prospective evaluation of the fate of 697 consecutive intraoral fixtures ad modem Brånemark in the rehabilitation of edentulism. J Head Neck Pathol 1987;6:53–58.
      1. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Brånemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347–359.
      1. Johns RB, Jemt T, Heath MR, Hutton JE, McKenna S, McNamara DC, van Steenberghe D, Taylor R, Watson RM, Herrmann IA. A multicenter study of overdentures supported by Brånemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:513–522.
      1. 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;9:170–177.
      1. Mericske-Stern R. Clinical evaluation of overdenture restorations supported by osseointegrated titanium implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:375–383.
      1. Cooper LF, Scurria MS, Lang LA, Guckes AD, Moriarty JD, Felton DA. Treatment of edentulism using Astra Tech implants and ball abutments to retain mandibular overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:646–653.
      1. Tallgren A. The continuing reduction of the residual alveolar ridges in complete denture wearers: a mixed-longitudinal study covering 25 years. J Prosthet Dent 1972;27:120–132.
      1. Kim YS. Implant adapted occlusion. J Korean Dent Assoc 2005;43:406–415.
      1. Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Kalk W. Factors to consider in selecting an occlusal concept for patients with implants in the edentulous mandible. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:380–384.
      1. Kim SO. In: Implant Overdenture. Seoul: Myungmoon Publishing; 2007. pp. 311-322.
    Cited by
    Crossref 1
    Google Scholar 
    MeSH Terms
    Academic Medical Centers
    Dental Implants
    Denture, Overlay
    Dentures
    Humans
    Male
    Mandible
    Survival Rate
    Metrics
    Share
    Figures
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 6

    Tables
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 5

    PERMALINK