Cargando…

Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study

Few studies have compared marginal bone loss (MBL) around implant-retaining overdentures (IODs) vs. implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPs). This study evaluated the mean MBL and radiographic bone-implant interface contact (r-BIIC) around IODs and implant-supported FPs. We also investigated osseoin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dorj, Odontuya, Lin, Chin-Kai, Salamanca, Eisner, Pan, Yu-Hwa, Wu, Yi-Fan, Hsu, Yung-Szu, Lin, Jerry C.-Y., Lin, Hsi-Kuei, Chang, Wei-Jen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8835213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35162773
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031750
_version_ 1784649374100357120
author Dorj, Odontuya
Lin, Chin-Kai
Salamanca, Eisner
Pan, Yu-Hwa
Wu, Yi-Fan
Hsu, Yung-Szu
Lin, Jerry C.-Y.
Lin, Hsi-Kuei
Chang, Wei-Jen
author_facet Dorj, Odontuya
Lin, Chin-Kai
Salamanca, Eisner
Pan, Yu-Hwa
Wu, Yi-Fan
Hsu, Yung-Szu
Lin, Jerry C.-Y.
Lin, Hsi-Kuei
Chang, Wei-Jen
author_sort Dorj, Odontuya
collection PubMed
description Few studies have compared marginal bone loss (MBL) around implant-retaining overdentures (IODs) vs. implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPs). This study evaluated the mean MBL and radiographic bone-implant interface contact (r-BIIC) around IODs and implant-supported FPs. We also investigated osseointegration and MBL around non-submerged dental implants. We measured the changes between the MBL in the mesial and distal sites immediately after prosthetic delivery and after one year. The mean MBL and its changes in the IOD group were significantly higher. The mean percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL and its changes in males were significantly higher in the IOD group. The percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL in the lower site in the IOD group was significantly higher. Regarding MBL, the location of the implant was the only significant factor in the IOD group, while gender was the only significant predictor in the FP group. Regarding the r-BIIC percentage, gender was a significant factor in the FP group. We concluded that non-submerged dental implants restored with FPs and IODs maintained stable bone remodeling one year after prosthetic delivery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8835213
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88352132022-02-12 Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study Dorj, Odontuya Lin, Chin-Kai Salamanca, Eisner Pan, Yu-Hwa Wu, Yi-Fan Hsu, Yung-Szu Lin, Jerry C.-Y. Lin, Hsi-Kuei Chang, Wei-Jen Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Few studies have compared marginal bone loss (MBL) around implant-retaining overdentures (IODs) vs. implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPs). This study evaluated the mean MBL and radiographic bone-implant interface contact (r-BIIC) around IODs and implant-supported FPs. We also investigated osseointegration and MBL around non-submerged dental implants. We measured the changes between the MBL in the mesial and distal sites immediately after prosthetic delivery and after one year. The mean MBL and its changes in the IOD group were significantly higher. The mean percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL and its changes in males were significantly higher in the IOD group. The percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL in the lower site in the IOD group was significantly higher. Regarding MBL, the location of the implant was the only significant factor in the IOD group, while gender was the only significant predictor in the FP group. Regarding the r-BIIC percentage, gender was a significant factor in the FP group. We concluded that non-submerged dental implants restored with FPs and IODs maintained stable bone remodeling one year after prosthetic delivery. MDPI 2022-02-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8835213/ /pubmed/35162773 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031750 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Dorj, Odontuya
Lin, Chin-Kai
Salamanca, Eisner
Pan, Yu-Hwa
Wu, Yi-Fan
Hsu, Yung-Szu
Lin, Jerry C.-Y.
Lin, Hsi-Kuei
Chang, Wei-Jen
Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title_full Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title_fullStr Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title_short Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study
title_sort marginal bone loss around implant-retaining overdentures versus implant-supported fixed prostheses 12-month follow-up: a retrospective study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8835213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35162773
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031750
work_keys_str_mv AT dorjodontuya marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT linchinkai marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT salamancaeisner marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT panyuhwa marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT wuyifan marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT hsuyungszu marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT linjerrycy marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT linhsikuei marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy
AT changweijen marginalbonelossaroundimplantretainingoverdenturesversusimplantsupportedfixedprostheses12monthfollowuparetrospectivestudy