Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: Patient-Related Outcome Measurements after Seven Years of Function.

Denture wearers often complain about jeopardized function and reduced quality of life due to lack of prosthesis' retention. Implant-retained mandibular overdentures, on two non-connected implants (2IOD) are well-proven solutions to overcome these issues. We prospectively assessed 69 patients and scrutinized clinical records until at least seven years of function. Thirty-six were retained on Locator® Abutments (LA) and thirty-tree on Ball Abutments (BA). Both systems were compared regarding the type, amount, and total cost of required maintenance. One implant was lost, yielding 98.7% survival after seven years. In total, 438 technical issues occurred: 121 (27.35%) in BA and 317 (72.4%) in LA. Out of these, 343 events (78%) were solved chairside: 191 (43.6%) were replacements of retention caps, 113 (25.8%) were minor acrylic repairs, 26 (5.9%) pressure ulcers had to be relieved, and 13 (3%) were related to abutments. LA required 179 insert replacements compared to 12 in the BA group. The overall initial treatment cost was EUR 3850 (base year of the analysis: 2003). The average total maintenance cost in relation to the initial cost for the LA and BA groups was 19.11 (range 0-82.24%) and 18.91% (range 0-113.26%) respectively (p = 0.540). Conclusions: The seven-year maintenance costs for a 2IOD is acceptable when the patient is regularly checked and professionally maintained. Most events are easily solvable chairside, but a few patients required more expensive interventions, regardless of the type of attachment used.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of two attachment systems for mandibular overdenture.

OBJECTIVES: This study analysed the cost-effectiveness of two different attachments for the 2-implant overdenture (2IOD) in edentulous mandibles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: When considering alternative treatments, cost-effectiveness analysis is an important factor for stakeholders (patient, clinician, social security, insurance company, etc.). A general practice population (n = 116) was treated between 2003 and 2013 with a mandibular 2IOD with 2 different ball/stud attachment systems, one spherical (Group D) and one cylindrical (Group L). Patient well-being was assessed with OHIP-14-Total (OHIP-14-T), at intake and annually up to 5 years, to calculate the health effect. Initial and maintenance costs of both treatments were inventoried. The cost-effectiveness was compared. Annual discount rates of 4% and 1.5% were applied to future costs and health outcomes, following Dutch guidelines. Prices were adjusted to the year 2003. To offset the uncertainty in relevant input parameters, a sensitivity analysis was performed using bootstrap analysis. Significance was set at p < .05. RESULTS: The health effect was 6.36 (SD 5.32) for Group D and 8.54 (SD 5.63) for Group L. The sum of the discounted costs up to 5 years was EUR 4,210.98 (SD 634.75) for the D and EUR 3,840.62 (SD 302.63) for the Group L (p = .005). The bootstrapping reports that L abutment clearly dominates the D abutment in terms of cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The 2IOD on the L abutment is dominant compared to the 2IOD on D abutment, in a 5-year perspective.

Five years follow-up of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on locator or ball abutments: Implant results, patient-related outcome, and prosthetic aftercare.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain, which is the optimal attachment for a mandibular 2-implant overdenture (2IOD). PURPOSE: To assess 5 years clinical implant outcome, prosthetic maintenance, cost, and PROMs of two cohorts receiving 2IOD on ball or stud abutments in a comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety edentulous individuals were treated with balls (n = 34) or locator (n = 56). Implant survival, bone-to-implant level, prosthetic outcome, technical maintenance, and OHIP-14 were assessed. Statistics to compare between baseline and 1/5 years and between groups were t-test or Mann-Whitney (P < .05); chi-square was adopted to analyze plaque and technical maintenance or interventions between groups. RESULTS: Five years implant survival was 98.7%, irrespective of attachment. Overall mean bone loss was 1.1 mm, probing pocket depth 1.92 mm, bleeding score 0.60, plaque score 1. Plaque accumulated more on locators (P = .023). OHIP-14 declined from 18.1 to 2.7 irrespective of attachment. Retention for balls was better (P < .005), locators required more maintenance (P < .001), caused by retention-adjustment (P < .001) or ulcers/pain (P = .014). Five years maintenance-cost was 11% of initial cost, irrespective of attachment. CONCLUSIONS: Balls and locators yield stable 5-years implant outcome and improved Oral Health Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL). Locators required more maintenance and resulted in a lower retention. Maintenance costs are minimal but may affect OHRQoL at least for stud abutments.

Five-year study of mandibular overdentures on stud abutments: Clinical outcome, patient satisfaction and prosthetic maintenance-Influence of bone resorption and implant position.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective study analyses the 5-year clinical outcome, patient satisfaction and the technical outcome of a 2-implant overdenture on stud abutments. In addition, the influence of mandibular resorption and implant position on these outcomes was assessed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients received two implants in a one-stage delayed protocol. Final prosthesis on stud abutments was finalized after 3 months. Implant survival, bone loss, plaque and sulcus bleeding index, OHIP-14, technical outcome and costs were assessed after 5 years. The Cawood-Howell classification defined the mandibular resorption. Inter-implant distances and angles (frontal, sagittal) were digitally measured. The significance level was p < .05. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients, 23 female and 33 males (mean age = 66.3, range 41-82), completed the follow-up. No implants were lost. Radiographical crestal bone loss was on average 1.25 mm (standard deviation SD 1.06), bleeding index was 0.75 (SD 0.73), and plaque index was 1.15 (SD 0.75) and higher for low mandibles (p = .001). The OHIP-14 reduction post-connection and after 5 years was significant (p < .001). Five-year maintenance required on average 6.7 (SD 4.8, range 0-25) interventions per patient. A larger inter-implant distance was associated with fewer replacement of retention inserts (p = .034) and less interventions (p = .006). Larger frontal (p = .023) and sagittal (p = .046) inter-implant angles (non-parallelism) required more inserts. The maintenance cost negatively influences the patient satisfaction (p = .004). 83% of the stud abutments showed wear. CONCLUSION: The implant overdenture on cylindrical stud abutments is a good and stable solution, irrespective of the resorption profile of the mandible. OHIP-14 improved permanently up to 5 years but is negatively influenced by complication cost. A small inter-implant distance, more frontal, sagittal inter-implant divergence increased maintenance.

The influence of initial soft tissue thickness on peri-implant bone remodeling.

AIM: To elucidate the influence of initial soft tissue thickness on peri-implant bone remodeling. The research hypothesis was that implants installed in patients or at sites with thin mucosal tissues would show increased peri-implant bone loss. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 79 edentulous patients were consecutively treated with two non-splinted implants supporting an overdenture in the mandible. During recall-visits, peri-implant health was determined by means of probing pocket depth and the modified plaque/bleeding index. Digital peri-apical radiographs were taken from individual implants. Bone level changes were measured from a reference point (lower border of the smooth implant collar) to the marginal bone-to-implant contact level. The linear mixed-effect model analysis was adopted to analyze the influence of clinical parameters and transmucosal abutment height on peri-implant bone loss. RESULTS: 67 patients attended the 1-year and 66 the 2-year recall-visit. Mean bone level changes were 0.89 mm (SD 0.62) and 0.90 mm (SD 0.66), plaque scores 0.82 (SD 0.94) and 0.87 (SD 0.92), bleeding scores 0.46 (SD 0.68) and 0.56 (SD 0.72) and PPD 1.65 mm (SD 0.60) and 1.78 mm (SD 0.59) after 1 year and 2 years respectively. The linear mixed-effect model revealed increasing bone level changes with decreasing abutment heights. Peri-implant bone level changes were significantly higher for implants with abutments of <2 mm (1.17 mm, p < .01; 1.23 mm, p < .01), 2 mm (0.86 mm, p < .01; 1.03 mm, p < .01) or 3 mm (0.38 mm, p = .046; 0.41 mm, p = .044) compared to ≥4 mm-abutments (bone level changes set to zero as reference value) both after 1 year and 2 years and bone level changes were significantly influenced by probing pocket depth (p < .01, p < .01), but not by plaque (p = .31, p = .09) and bleeding scores (p = .30, p = .40). CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that implants with lower abutments, reflecting the initial gingival thickness, lose more peri-implant bone, possibly by a re-establishment of the biological width.

Clinical outcome of overdenture treatment on two nonsubmerged and nonsplinted Astra Tech Microthread implants.

BACKGROUND: The use of two implants for mandibular overdenture stabilization improves the patients' comfort and well-being. This treatment could be more cost-effective if surgery and prosthetic treatment could be performed by one clinician in the normal setting of a dental clinic. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to describe implant success, restorative outcome, and the patients' opinion of mandibular overdenture treatment on two early-loaded, nonsplinted Astra Tech TiOblast Microthread (Astra Tech Dental, Mölndal, Sweden) implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven consecutive patients treated with implant-supported mandibular overdentures were invited for a clinical examination. Implant survival, marginal bone level, quality of implant and prosthetic treatment, and the patients' opinion by means of questionnaires were scored. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients attended the examination. Two implants were lost in one patient and the failure rate for the total group of patients was 3%. As 8 of the 33 remaining patients were still in the provisional loading stage, they were not included in the final clinical and radiographic examination. Based on 25 patients and 50 implants with a mean follow-up of 18.8 months (range 4-33), implant positioning and occlusion/articulation scored perfect in 74 to 80% of the cases. Retention of the dentures was rated perfect in 80%, but 20% needed minor activation of the attachments, 20% showed signs of abrasion, and 20% had already been repaired. The average marginal bone level was 0.8 mm below the reference point. The mean pocket depth was 2.1 mm, and 54% of the peri-implant tissues were free of bleeding. The patients were appreciative of the work carried out by their dentist and they indicated a significant improvement in their well-being and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the Astra Tech implant system was successfully used by the general dentist both surgically and prosthetically with minimal implant failures and prosthetic complications and that this led to high levels of patient appreciation and overall satisfaction.