The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants · 2008
Implant-supported maxillary overdentures retained with milled bars: maxillary anterior versus maxillary posterior concept--a retrospective study.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Krennmair Gerald, Krainhöfner Martin, Piehslinger Eva
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of the present retrospective investigation was to evaluate implant-supported maxillary overdentures using either anterior (group 1) or posterior (group 2) maxillary implant placement.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Maxillary overdentures were planned with support by either 4 implants placed in the maxillary anterior region (group 1) or 6 to 8 implants placed in augmented maxillary posterior regions (group 2, bilateral sinus augmentation) and anchored either on an anterior or on 2 bilaterally placed milled bars. Cumulative implant survival rate, peri-implant conditions (marginal bone loss, pocket depth, Plaque Index, Gingival Index, Bleeding Index, and Calculus Index) and the incidence and type of prosthodontic maintenance were assessed and compared for the 2 groups. In addition, the cumulative survival rate for implants placed in grafted regions was compared with that of implants placed in nongrafted regions.
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (16 for group 1 and 18 for group 2) with 179 implants were available for follow-up examination after a mean period of 42.1 +/- 20.1 months. Four initially placed implants failed to osseointegrate and were replaced, but no further losses were seen during the loading period, for a 5-year cumulative implant survival rate of 978%. No differences in implant survival rates were seen between either the group-1 (98.4%) and group-2 (97.4%) concepts or nongrafted (98.0%) and grafted (97.5%) implants. The peri-implant parameters showed a healthy soft tissue, good oral hygiene, and an acceptable degree of peri-implant marginal bone loss. The rigid fixation of all overdentures was associated with a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance, without any significant differences between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In well-planned overdenture treatment programs, a high survival rate and excellent peri-implant conditions can be achieved for implants placed in the anterior or posterior maxilla. Rigid anchorage of maxillary overdentures either on an extended anterior milled bar or on 2 bilateral posterior milled bars provides for a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Maxillary overdentures were planned with support by either 4 implants placed in the maxillary anterior region (group 1) or 6 to 8 implants placed in augmented maxillary posterior regions (group 2, bilateral sinus augmentation) and anchored either on an anterior or on 2 bilaterally placed milled bars. Cumulative implant survival rate, peri-implant conditions (marginal bone loss, pocket depth, Plaque Index, Gingival Index, Bleeding Index, and Calculus Index) and the incidence and type of prosthodontic maintenance were assessed and compared for the 2 groups. In addition, the cumulative survival rate for implants placed in grafted regions was compared with that of implants placed in nongrafted regions.
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (16 for group 1 and 18 for group 2) with 179 implants were available for follow-up examination after a mean period of 42.1 +/- 20.1 months. Four initially placed implants failed to osseointegrate and were replaced, but no further losses were seen during the loading period, for a 5-year cumulative implant survival rate of 978%. No differences in implant survival rates were seen between either the group-1 (98.4%) and group-2 (97.4%) concepts or nongrafted (98.0%) and grafted (97.5%) implants. The peri-implant parameters showed a healthy soft tissue, good oral hygiene, and an acceptable degree of peri-implant marginal bone loss. The rigid fixation of all overdentures was associated with a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance, without any significant differences between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In well-planned overdenture treatment programs, a high survival rate and excellent peri-implant conditions can be achieved for implants placed in the anterior or posterior maxilla. Rigid anchorage of maxillary overdentures either on an extended anterior milled bar or on 2 bilateral posterior milled bars provides for a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Alveolar Bone LossBone TransplantationDental Implantation, EndosseousDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDental Restoration FailureDenture RetentionDenture, Complete, UpperDenture, OverlayFemaleHumansIncisorLife TablesMaleMaxillary SinusMiddle AgedMolarOral Surgical Procedures, PreprostheticPatient SatisfactionPeriodontal IndexRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome