Cargando…

Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical findings and patient satisfaction on implant overdenture designed with Locator implant attachment or Locator bar attachment in mandibular edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, probing depth,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seo, Yong-Ho, Bae, Eun-Bin, Kim, Jung-Woo, Lee, So-Hyoun, Yun, Mi-Jung, Jeong, Chang-Mo, Jeon, Young-Chan, Huh, Jung-Bo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4993845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27555901
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.4.313
_version_ 1782449205413937152
author Seo, Yong-Ho
Bae, Eun-Bin
Kim, Jung-Woo
Lee, So-Hyoun
Yun, Mi-Jung
Jeong, Chang-Mo
Jeon, Young-Chan
Huh, Jung-Bo
author_facet Seo, Yong-Ho
Bae, Eun-Bin
Kim, Jung-Woo
Lee, So-Hyoun
Yun, Mi-Jung
Jeong, Chang-Mo
Jeon, Young-Chan
Huh, Jung-Bo
author_sort Seo, Yong-Ho
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical findings and patient satisfaction on implant overdenture designed with Locator implant attachment or Locator bar attachment in mandibular edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, probing depth, peri-implant inflammation, bleeding, plaque, calculus, complications, and satisfaction were evaluated on sixteen patients who were treated with mandibular overdenture and have used it for at least 1 year (Locator implant attachment: n=8, Locator bar attachment: n=8). RESULTS: Marginal bone loss, probing depth, plaque index of the Locator bar attachment group were significantly lower than the Locator implant attachment group (P<.05). There was no significant difference on bleeding, peri-implant inflammation, and patient satisfaction between the two denture types (P>.05). The replacement of the attachment components was the most common complication in both groups. Although there was no correlation between marginal bone loss and plaque index, a significant correlation was found between marginal bone loss and probing depth. CONCLUSION: The Locator bar attachment group indicates lesser marginal bone loss and need for maintenance, as compared with the Locator implant attachment group. This may be due to the splinting effect among implants rather than the types of Locator attachment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4993845
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49938452016-08-23 Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment Seo, Yong-Ho Bae, Eun-Bin Kim, Jung-Woo Lee, So-Hyoun Yun, Mi-Jung Jeong, Chang-Mo Jeon, Young-Chan Huh, Jung-Bo J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical findings and patient satisfaction on implant overdenture designed with Locator implant attachment or Locator bar attachment in mandibular edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, probing depth, peri-implant inflammation, bleeding, plaque, calculus, complications, and satisfaction were evaluated on sixteen patients who were treated with mandibular overdenture and have used it for at least 1 year (Locator implant attachment: n=8, Locator bar attachment: n=8). RESULTS: Marginal bone loss, probing depth, plaque index of the Locator bar attachment group were significantly lower than the Locator implant attachment group (P<.05). There was no significant difference on bleeding, peri-implant inflammation, and patient satisfaction between the two denture types (P>.05). The replacement of the attachment components was the most common complication in both groups. Although there was no correlation between marginal bone loss and plaque index, a significant correlation was found between marginal bone loss and probing depth. CONCLUSION: The Locator bar attachment group indicates lesser marginal bone loss and need for maintenance, as compared with the Locator implant attachment group. This may be due to the splinting effect among implants rather than the types of Locator attachment. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2016-08 2016-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4993845/ /pubmed/27555901 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.4.313 Text en © 2016 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Seo, Yong-Ho
Bae, Eun-Bin
Kim, Jung-Woo
Lee, So-Hyoun
Yun, Mi-Jung
Jeong, Chang-Mo
Jeon, Young-Chan
Huh, Jung-Bo
Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title_full Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title_fullStr Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title_full_unstemmed Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title_short Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment
title_sort clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via locator implant attachment and locator bar attachment
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4993845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27555901
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.4.313
work_keys_str_mv AT seoyongho clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT baeeunbin clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT kimjungwoo clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT leesohyoun clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT yunmijung clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT jeongchangmo clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT jeonyoungchan clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment
AT huhjungbo clinicalevaluationofmandibularimplantoverdenturesvialocatorimplantattachmentandlocatorbarattachment