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,...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |