Abdel Rahman M Maged, Noha Helmy Hassan Nawar, Hany Eid, Yasser M. Shawky
{"title":"由种植体和天然牙支持的两种弹性附着体固位下颌覆盖义齿对支持结构影响的临床评估","authors":"Abdel Rahman M Maged, Noha Helmy Hassan Nawar, Hany Eid, Yasser M. Shawky","doi":"10.21608/asdj.2024.287725.1284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This study aimed to assess the effect of two resilient attachments used for retention of mandibular over-denture supported by an implant and a natural tooth on the supporting structures throughout a one-year follow-up period. Materials and methods: Fourteen patients with maxillary completely edentulous arches and only one standing natural mandibular canine were selected. Each patient received a dental implant with 10.5 mm length and 3.8 mm diameter at the canine region of the contralateral side of the mandible. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of attachment used (n=7); BC group included patients who received mandibular over-dentures retained by bar clip attachment supported by an implant on one side and a natural tooth on the other side. BS group involved patients who received a mandibular implant splinted to the natural canine by bar joint attachment utilizing soft liner material. The patients of both groups were rehabilitated with conventional maxillary complete dentures. Clinical and radiographic assessment were performed immediately after over-denture delivery, six and twelve months from denture insertion. Clinical evaluation involved gingival index. Radiographic evaluation included measuring mesial, distal, buccal and lingual bone height differences. Results: BC group recorded significantly higher bone loss compared to BS group around both dental implants and natural teeth. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, it could be concluded that soft liner retained over-dentures are more effective in decreasing bone resorption around the implants and natural teeth compared to clip retained over-dentures.","PeriodicalId":505319,"journal":{"name":"Ain Shams Dental Journal","volume":"5 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Evaluation of the Effect of two Resilient Attachments Retaining Mandibular Over-Denture Supported by Implant and Natural Tooth on the Supporting Structures\",\"authors\":\"Abdel Rahman M Maged, Noha Helmy Hassan Nawar, Hany Eid, Yasser M. Shawky\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/asdj.2024.287725.1284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: This study aimed to assess the effect of two resilient attachments used for retention of mandibular over-denture supported by an implant and a natural tooth on the supporting structures throughout a one-year follow-up period. Materials and methods: Fourteen patients with maxillary completely edentulous arches and only one standing natural mandibular canine were selected. Each patient received a dental implant with 10.5 mm length and 3.8 mm diameter at the canine region of the contralateral side of the mandible. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of attachment used (n=7); BC group included patients who received mandibular over-dentures retained by bar clip attachment supported by an implant on one side and a natural tooth on the other side. BS group involved patients who received a mandibular implant splinted to the natural canine by bar joint attachment utilizing soft liner material. The patients of both groups were rehabilitated with conventional maxillary complete dentures. Clinical and radiographic assessment were performed immediately after over-denture delivery, six and twelve months from denture insertion. Clinical evaluation involved gingival index. Radiographic evaluation included measuring mesial, distal, buccal and lingual bone height differences. Results: BC group recorded significantly higher bone loss compared to BS group around both dental implants and natural teeth. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, it could be concluded that soft liner retained over-dentures are more effective in decreasing bone resorption around the implants and natural teeth compared to clip retained over-dentures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":505319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ain Shams Dental Journal\",\"volume\":\"5 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ain Shams Dental Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/asdj.2024.287725.1284\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain Shams Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/asdj.2024.287725.1284","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical Evaluation of the Effect of two Resilient Attachments Retaining Mandibular Over-Denture Supported by Implant and Natural Tooth on the Supporting Structures
Aim: This study aimed to assess the effect of two resilient attachments used for retention of mandibular over-denture supported by an implant and a natural tooth on the supporting structures throughout a one-year follow-up period. Materials and methods: Fourteen patients with maxillary completely edentulous arches and only one standing natural mandibular canine were selected. Each patient received a dental implant with 10.5 mm length and 3.8 mm diameter at the canine region of the contralateral side of the mandible. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of attachment used (n=7); BC group included patients who received mandibular over-dentures retained by bar clip attachment supported by an implant on one side and a natural tooth on the other side. BS group involved patients who received a mandibular implant splinted to the natural canine by bar joint attachment utilizing soft liner material. The patients of both groups were rehabilitated with conventional maxillary complete dentures. Clinical and radiographic assessment were performed immediately after over-denture delivery, six and twelve months from denture insertion. Clinical evaluation involved gingival index. Radiographic evaluation included measuring mesial, distal, buccal and lingual bone height differences. Results: BC group recorded significantly higher bone loss compared to BS group around both dental implants and natural teeth. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, it could be concluded that soft liner retained over-dentures are more effective in decreasing bone resorption around the implants and natural teeth compared to clip retained over-dentures.