The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 10 ( 2018 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Effects of Excessive Implant Angulation on Retention of Two Types of Overdenture Attachments during Cyclic Loading

Seyed MR Hakimaneh, Shireen Shidfar, Hadi Teimoori, Sayed S Shayegh, Maryam A Zavaree, Farinaz Khodadad, Mohammad T Baghani

Keywords : Dental implants, Dental prosthesis, Implant angulation, Implant-supported Overdenture, Retention.

Citation Information : Hakimaneh SM, Shidfar S, Teimoori H, Shayegh SS, Zavaree MA, Khodadad F, Baghani MT. Effects of Excessive Implant Angulation on Retention of Two Types of Overdenture Attachments during Cyclic Loading. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (10):1221-1227.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2408

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 00-10-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim: This study investigated the effects of implant angulation and cyclic dislodgment on retention of Locator and Dalbo Plus attachments. Materials and methods: Fifty pairs of acrylic blocks for five implant angulations (0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 degrees) and two attachment systems (locator and Dalbo Plus®; n = 5) were fabricated. In each pair, one block contained two implant analogs connected to their attachments, and the other block contained matrix parts of the attachments. 1440 cycles of insertion and removal were implicated on specimens after mounting the blocks in the universal testing machine. The retention was registered at cycle numbers 1, 120, 360, 720, and 1440. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan\'s multiple range test (p ≤p 0.05). Results: Data analysis showed that implant angulation had significant effects on retention of both attachments at all different angles (p ≤ 0.05). Dalbo Plus showed no significant differences between 30 and 40 degrees (p ≥ 0.05), but between 0 and 30 degrees, differences were significant (p ≤ 0.05). Moreover, cyclic loading had significant effects on retention of both attachments at all different loading cycles (p ≤ 0.05). On evaluating combined effects of cyclic loading and implant angulation on retention, a significant decrease in retention was noted for both Locator and Dalbo Plus attachments at angulations of 0, 10, 20 degrees after 1440 cycles (1 year of clinical use; p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: Both angulation and cyclic loading have negative effects on implant-supported overdentures and decrease retention over time. Furthermore, as the angle between implants increases, decrement of retention becomes more significant. Clinical significance:Inter-implant angulation could play a significant role in overdenture retention


PDF Share
  1. Heckmann SM, Heußinger S, Linke JJ, Graef F, Pröschel P. Improvement and long-term stability of neuromuscular adaptation in implant-supported overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(11):1200-1205.
  2. Ueda T, Kremer U, Katsoulis J, Mericske-Stern R. Long-term results of mandibular implants supporting an overdenture: implant survival, failures, and crestal bone level changes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(2):365-372.
  3. Dudic A, Mericske-Stern R. Retention Mechanisms and Prosthetic Complications of Implant-Supported Mandibular Overdentures: Long-Term Results. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2002;4(4):212-219.
  4. MacEntee MI, Walton JN CNA. clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prothodontics needs with ball and bar attachments for implant retained complete overdentures: three-years results. J prosthet Dent. 2005;93:28-37. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0022391304006882. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  5. Kordatzis K, Wright PS, Meijer HJ a. Posterior mandibular residual ridge resorption in patients with conventional dentures and implant overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(3):447-452. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/p. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  6. Tallgren A. The continuing ridges reduction denture study of the residual wearers : covering alvealar in complete 25 years. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;27(2):120-132.
  7. Awad M a, Lund JP, Shapiro SH, et al. Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: a randomized clinical trial in a senior population. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(4):390-396.
  8. Stellingsma K, Slagter AP, Stegenga B, Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJA. Masticatory function in patients with an extremely resorbed mandible restored with mandibular implant-retained overdentures: Comparison of three types of treatment protocols. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(6):403-410.
  9. Stewart B, Edwards R. Retention and wear of precision type attachments. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;49:28-34. http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022391383902330. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  10. Alsabeeha, Nabeel HM; Payne, Alan GT, Swain MV. Attachment Systems for Mandibular Two-Implant Overdentures: A Review of In Vitro Investigations on Retention an Wear Features. J Chem Inf Model. 2013;53(9):1689-1699.
  11. Andreiotelli M, Att W, Strub JR. Prosthodontic complications with implant overdentures: a systematic literature review. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23(3):195-203.
  12. Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JYK. Clinical Complication with Implants and Implant Protheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(2):121-132.
  13. Fromentin O, Picard B, Tavernier B. In vitro study of the retention and mechanical fatigue behavior of four implant overdenture stud-type attachments. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1999;11(3):391-7; quiz 398. http://europepmc. org/abstract/med/10379298. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  14. Rutkunas V, Mizutani H, Takahashi H. Influence of attachment wear on retention of mandibular overdenture. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(1):41-51.
  15. Aroso C, Silva AS, Ustrell R, et al. Effect of abutment angulation in the retention and durability of three overdenture attachment systems: An in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8(1):21.
  16. Kobayashi M, Srinivasan M, Ammann P, et al. Effects of in vitro cyclic dislodging on retentive force and removal torque of three overdenture attachment systems. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(4):426-434.
  17. The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81(1):39-110. ht tp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/10200082. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  18. Naert I, Quirynen M, Theuniers G, van Steenberghe D. Prosthetic aspects of osseointegrated fixtures supporting overdentures. A 4-year report. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;65(5):671-680.
  19. Feine JS, de Grandmont P, Boudrias P, et al. Within-subject Comparisons of Implant-supported Mandibular Prostheses Choice of Prosthesis 1994. J Dent Res. 1994;73(5):1105- 1111.
  20. Stoker G, Wismeijer D, van Waas MAJ. An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Aftercare and Cost-analysis with Three Types of Mandibular Implantretained Overdentures. J Dent Res. 2007;86(3):276-280.
  21. Chaffee N, Felton D, Cooper L, Palmqvist U, Smith R. Prosthetic complication in an implant-retained mandibular overdenture population : Initial analysis of a prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87(1):40–44. http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391302377989. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  22. Payne AG, Solomons YF. Mandibular implant-supported overdentures: a prospective evaluation of the burden of prosthodontic maintenance with 3 different attachment systems. Int J Prosthodont. 2000;13(3):246-253.
  23. Besimo CE, Guarneri A. In vitro retention force changes of prefabricated attachments for overdentures. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(7):671-678.
  24. Doundoulakis JH, Eckert SE, Lindquist CC, Jeffcoat MK. The implant-supported overdenture as an alternative to the complete mandibular denture. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134(11):1455-1458.
  25. Cune MS, van Kampen FMC, van der Bilt A, Bosman F. Patient satisfaction and preference with magnet, bar-clip, and ball-socket retained mandibular implant overdentures: a cross-over clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(2):99- 105.
  26. Shayegh SS, Hakimaneh SMR, Baghani MT, et al. Effect of interimplant distance and cyclic loading on the retention of overdenture attachments. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017;18(11):1078-1084.
  27. Atashrazm P. The Influence of Inclined Implants and Attachments on the Retention and Longevity of Implant- Retained Overdentures: An In Vitro Study. J Dent Shiraz Univ Med Scien. 2012;13(3):90-96. http://dentjods.sums. ac.ir/index.php/JDSUMS/article/view/40. Accessed December 23, 2017.
  28. Al-Ghafli S, Michalakis K, Hirayama H, Kang K. The in vitro effect of different implant angulations and cyclic dislodgement on the retentive properties of an overdenture attachment system. J prosthet Dent. 2009;102(3):140-147.
  29. Rutkunas V, Mizutani H, Takahashi H, Iwasaki N. Wear simulation effects on overdenture stud attachments. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(6):845-853.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.