Clinical outcomes of different implant types in mandibular bar-retained overdentures: a retrospective analysis with up to 20 years follow-up

被引:4
|
作者
Betthauser, M. [1 ]
Schilter, R. [1 ]
Enkling, N. [1 ,2 ]
Suter, V. G. A. [3 ]
Abou-Ayash, S. [1 ]
Schimmel, M. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bern, Sch Dent Med, Dept Reconstruct Dent & Gerodontol, Bern, Switzerland
[2] Univ Bonn, Med Fac, Dept Prosthodont Preclin Educ & Dent Mat Sci, Bonn, Germany
[3] Univ Bern, Sch Dent Med, Dept Oral Surg & Stomatol, Bern, Switzerland
[4] Univ Geneva, Univ Clin Dent Med, Div Gerodontol & Removable Prosthodont, Geneva, Switzerland
关键词
Implant overdentures; Bar-attachments; Peri-implant bone-level changes; Implant success; Implant survival; BONE-LEVEL CHANGES; PERI-IMPLANTITIS; THERAPY; INFLAMMATION; SURFACE;
D O I
10.1186/s40729-022-00439-x
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose To determine the clinical and radiological outcomes of hybrid-design- (HD) and bone-level (BL) implants for bar-retained mandibular implant-overdentures (IODs). Methods For this retrospective study, edentulous patients who had received maxillary complete dentures and mandibular bar-retained IODs were invited for a follow-up assessment. Implant survival, implant success and health of peri-implant tissues were assessed on an implant level-based analysis. Patient-based parameters served to identify risk factors for peri-implant bone loss, presence of peri-implantitis and success. Results Eighty patients (median age 72.72 [67.03; 78.81] years, 46 females) with 180 implants (median follow-up 12.01 [10.82; 21.04] years) were assessed. There was no difference concerning the rate of implant failure (p = 0.26), or peri-implantitis (p = 0.97) between HD and BL implants. Solely in one study group, there was the presence of peri-implant pus. Implant success was higher in BL implants with one group being notably higher than the comparing groups (p = 0.045). For bone loss, a width of keratinized mucosa (KM) <= 1 mm (p = 0.0006) and the presence of xerostomia (p = 0.09) were identified as risk factors. Smoking (p = 0.013) and a higher body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.03) were a risk factor for peri-implantitis. As risk factors for reduced implant success, a small width of KM (p = 0.003) and the presence of xerostomia (p = 0.007) were identified. Conclusions For mandibular bar-retained IODs, both BL and HD implants are mostly successful. A minimum of 1 mm KM around implants and normal salivary flow are relevant factors for implant success and stable peri-implant bone levels. Smoking and a high BMI are potential risk factors for peri-implantitis.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Follow up and maintenance of implant supported prostheses: A comparison of 20 complete mandibular overdentures and 20 complete mandibular fixed cantilever prostheses
    Watson, RM
    Davis, DM
    BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 1996, 181 (09) : 321 - 327
  • [22] A Prospective Study of Immediately Loaded Single Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: Long-Term Results with 15 Year Follow-up
    Liddelow, Glen
    Wilshaw, Veronica
    Henry, Patrick
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2023, 37 (02) : 145 - 152
  • [23] Assessment of Retention of Implant Bearing Mandibular Overdentures with Various Attachments: A Three-Year Follow-Up
    Singh, Kavipal
    Singh, Jashandeep
    Suman, Neelam
    Kaur, Ravneet
    Chopra, Priyanka
    JOURNAL OF PHARMACY AND BIOALLIED SCIENCES, 2024, 16 : S2112 - S2115
  • [24] Clinical outcomes of small-diameter implant-retained overdentures. a retrospective analysis
    Rujiraphan, T.
    Suphangul, S.
    Amornsettachai, P.
    Thiradilok, S.
    Panyayong, W.
    JOURNAL OF OSSEOINTEGRATION, 2021, 13 (04) : 191 - 197
  • [25] THE TUBINGEN IMPLANT - 13 YEARS OF CLINICAL TREATMENT AND FOLLOW-UP
    DHOEDT, B
    SCHULTE, W
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1989, 68 (04) : 640 - 640
  • [26] Immediate versus conventional loading of mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a 3‐year follow‐up of a randomized controlled trial
    Anna Paula da Rosa Possebon
    Alessandra Julie Schuster
    Otacílio Luiz Chagas-Júnior
    Luciana de Rezende Pinto
    Fernanda Faot
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2023, 27 : 5935 - 5946
  • [27] A Clinical and Radiographic 3 Years Retrospective Study for Two Types of Locator Retained Mandibular Implant Overdenture
    Ibrahim, Christine Raouf Micheal
    Aboelez, Marwa Ahmed
    Elkashty, Ayman Abdel Rahim Mohammed
    Awad, Heba Nabil
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2025, 27 (01)
  • [28] Overdentures on primary mandibular implants in patients with oral cancer: a follow-up study over 14 years
    Korfage, Anke
    Raghoebar, Gerry M.
    Slater, James J. R. Huddleston
    Roodenburg, Jan L. N.
    Witjes, Max J. H.
    Vissink, Arjan
    Reintsema, Harry
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2014, 52 (09): : 798 - 805
  • [29] A Systematic Review of the Clinical Performance of Tooth-Retained and Implant-Retained Double Crown Prostheses with a Follow-Up of ≥3 Years
    Verma, Rohini
    Joda, Tim
    Braegger, Urs
    Wittneben, Julia-Gabriela
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2013, 22 (01): : 2 - 12
  • [30] Platform switching in two-implant bar-retained mandibular overdentures: 1-year results from a split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial
    Abou-Ayash, Samir
    Schimmel, Martin
    Kraus, Dominik
    Mericske-Stern, Regina
    Albrecht, Dominic
    Enkling, Norbert
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2020, 31 (10) : 968 - 979