Lateral incisors versus canine areas for two implant placements used to retain mandibular overdenture: Periodic monitoring of ridge base contact relation
Khloud E Mourad, Radwa Kamal Emera, W. Ahmed, A. Habib
{"title":"Lateral incisors versus canine areas for two implant placements used to retain mandibular overdenture: Periodic monitoring of ridge base contact relation","authors":"Khloud E Mourad, Radwa Kamal Emera, W. Ahmed, A. Habib","doi":"10.4103/jdi.jdi_26_19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study aimed to compare the effect of two different implants' position (lateral incisors and canine areas) to retain mandibular complete overdenture on the ridge base contact relation after 6 months of overdenture use. Materials and Methods: Ten completely edentulous patients were selected from the Outpatient Clinic of Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University. According to the position of implant placement, patients were randomly classified into two equal groups; Group I where two implants were placed in the lateral incisors' area and Group II where two implants were placed in the canines' area. Positioner attachment was connected to the implant fixture to retain the mandibular implant overdenture. Periodic monitoring of ridge base contact relation was carried out at the time of insertion (T0) and 6 months (T6) later using cone-beam computed tomography (the dual scan technique procedures). Results: There was a statistically insignificant difference between the two groups (lateral incisors' position group and canines' position group) regarding the ridge base contact relationship. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study (patient number and study period), the ridge base relationship of two implants retained mandibular overdenture is maintained regardless of the implants' position.","PeriodicalId":212982,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Implants","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jdi.jdi_26_19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the effect of two different implants' position (lateral incisors and canine areas) to retain mandibular complete overdenture on the ridge base contact relation after 6 months of overdenture use. Materials and Methods: Ten completely edentulous patients were selected from the Outpatient Clinic of Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University. According to the position of implant placement, patients were randomly classified into two equal groups; Group I where two implants were placed in the lateral incisors' area and Group II where two implants were placed in the canines' area. Positioner attachment was connected to the implant fixture to retain the mandibular implant overdenture. Periodic monitoring of ridge base contact relation was carried out at the time of insertion (T0) and 6 months (T6) later using cone-beam computed tomography (the dual scan technique procedures). Results: There was a statistically insignificant difference between the two groups (lateral incisors' position group and canines' position group) regarding the ridge base contact relationship. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study (patient number and study period), the ridge base relationship of two implants retained mandibular overdenture is maintained regardless of the implants' position.