Cargando…

Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients

Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mañes Ferrer, José Félix, Fernández-Estevan, Lucía, Selva-Otaolaurruchi, Eduardo, Labaig-Rueda, Carlos, Solá-Ruíz, María Fernanda, Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32204564
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030139
_version_ 1783519527950090240
author Mañes Ferrer, José Félix
Fernández-Estevan, Lucía
Selva-Otaolaurruchi, Eduardo
Labaig-Rueda, Carlos
Solá-Ruíz, María Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
author_facet Mañes Ferrer, José Félix
Fernández-Estevan, Lucía
Selva-Otaolaurruchi, Eduardo
Labaig-Rueda, Carlos
Solá-Ruíz, María Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
author_sort Mañes Ferrer, José Félix
collection PubMed
description Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods: This prospective study assessed patients presenting complete maxillary edentulism, rehabilitated by means of implant-supported overdentures (n = 20), 10 with Locator® axial retention (ODA group) and 10 with overdentures on bars (ODB group). Patients also completed a questionnaire to determine their satisfaction with treatment. Results: The mean follow-up time in both groups was 11.4 years, with follow-up times in both groups ranging from 5 to 14 years. The ODA group suffered mechanical complications such as retention loss, need for nylon retention insert changes, resin fracture, and need for relining. In the ODB group, prosthetic dental wear, screw loosening, and complete prosthetic failure were more common. A total of 19 implants failed (23.8%); of these, 11 were in the ODA group (failure rate = 27.5%) and eight in the ODB group (failure rate = 20%). The patient satisfaction questionnaire obtained a mean score of 7.9 out of 10 in the ODA group, and 9.75 in the ODB group. Conclusions: in rehabilitations of edentulous maxillar by means of implant-supported overdentures, both the systems assessed were shown to be effective in the medium to long term. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with the treatments received.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7143068
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71430682020-04-14 Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients Mañes Ferrer, José Félix Fernández-Estevan, Lucía Selva-Otaolaurruchi, Eduardo Labaig-Rueda, Carlos Solá-Ruíz, María Fernanda Agustín-Panadero, Rubén Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods: This prospective study assessed patients presenting complete maxillary edentulism, rehabilitated by means of implant-supported overdentures (n = 20), 10 with Locator® axial retention (ODA group) and 10 with overdentures on bars (ODB group). Patients also completed a questionnaire to determine their satisfaction with treatment. Results: The mean follow-up time in both groups was 11.4 years, with follow-up times in both groups ranging from 5 to 14 years. The ODA group suffered mechanical complications such as retention loss, need for nylon retention insert changes, resin fracture, and need for relining. In the ODB group, prosthetic dental wear, screw loosening, and complete prosthetic failure were more common. A total of 19 implants failed (23.8%); of these, 11 were in the ODA group (failure rate = 27.5%) and eight in the ODB group (failure rate = 20%). The patient satisfaction questionnaire obtained a mean score of 7.9 out of 10 in the ODA group, and 9.75 in the ODB group. Conclusions: in rehabilitations of edentulous maxillar by means of implant-supported overdentures, both the systems assessed were shown to be effective in the medium to long term. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with the treatments received. MDPI 2020-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7143068/ /pubmed/32204564 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030139 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Mañes Ferrer, José Félix
Fernández-Estevan, Lucía
Selva-Otaolaurruchi, Eduardo
Labaig-Rueda, Carlos
Solá-Ruíz, María Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title_full Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title_fullStr Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title_full_unstemmed Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title_short Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients
title_sort maxillary implant-supported overdentures: mechanical behavior comparing individual axial and bar retention systems. a cohort study of edentulous patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32204564
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030139
work_keys_str_mv AT manesferrerjosefelix maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients
AT fernandezestevanlucia maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients
AT selvaotaolaurruchieduardo maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients
AT labaigruedacarlos maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients
AT solaruizmariafernanda maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients
AT agustinpanaderoruben maxillaryimplantsupportedoverdenturesmechanicalbehaviorcomparingindividualaxialandbarretentionsystemsacohortstudyofedentulouspatients