IADR Abstract Archives
Mandibular Implant Overdentures Retained by Bars with Long Distal Extensions
Objectives: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) tested the hypothesis that mandibular overdentures with CAD/CAM-milled titanium bars with long distal extensions on two implants are not an inferior treatment to conventional overdentures on two ball attachments.
Methods: This RCT received ethics approval (CCER#: 11-173/Psy 11-20). Forty completely edentulous patients with conventional maxillary complete dentures and mandibular overdentures on 2 implants were bloc-randomized into the two study groups [Control group (CG): n=20, intervention: ball attachments with Dalbo-Plus; Experimental group (EG): n=20, intervention: CAD/CAM-milled titanium bars with 15 mm long distal extensions and gold clip]. Endpoints included plaque (PI) and bleeding (BI) indices, radiographically-evaluated peri-implant bone loss (PIBL), chewing efficiency (CE): Subjective assessment (SA) and variance of hue (VoH), maximum bite-force (MBF), OHIP20 and patient denture satisfaction (DSI). Endpoints were measured at baseline (BL), two weeks (T0), 6-months (T1) and at 1-year (T2) after the intervention. ANOVA and post-hoc tests were applied for statistical analyses (alpha=0.05).
Results: 38 participants completed the T2 follow up visit (one dropout in each group). At baseline, there was a significant difference between EG and CG in the DSI (p=0.038) but no differences in the other parameters.
Within EG, at T2, there was increased PI (p=0.027) and BI (p=0.019) along with improvements in SA (p=0.0002), and DSI (p=0.023). No other changes were observed. At T2, there was no change within subjects for any of the investigated outcome measures in CG.
Between the study groups, at T2, participants of EG demonstrated better CE (SA: p<0.0001; VoH: p=0.008) and higher MBF (p=0.0002).
Conclusions: The preliminary results of this RCT confirm that mandibular overdentures on two implants retained by bars with long distal extensions are not an inferior treatment concept to conventional overdentures on ball attachments and may in the short term (1-year) provide functional advantages in terms of CE and MBF.
Methods: This RCT received ethics approval (CCER#: 11-173/Psy 11-20). Forty completely edentulous patients with conventional maxillary complete dentures and mandibular overdentures on 2 implants were bloc-randomized into the two study groups [Control group (CG): n=20, intervention: ball attachments with Dalbo-Plus; Experimental group (EG): n=20, intervention: CAD/CAM-milled titanium bars with 15 mm long distal extensions and gold clip]. Endpoints included plaque (PI) and bleeding (BI) indices, radiographically-evaluated peri-implant bone loss (PIBL), chewing efficiency (CE): Subjective assessment (SA) and variance of hue (VoH), maximum bite-force (MBF), OHIP20 and patient denture satisfaction (DSI). Endpoints were measured at baseline (BL), two weeks (T0), 6-months (T1) and at 1-year (T2) after the intervention. ANOVA and post-hoc tests were applied for statistical analyses (alpha=0.05).
Results: 38 participants completed the T2 follow up visit (one dropout in each group). At baseline, there was a significant difference between EG and CG in the DSI (p=0.038) but no differences in the other parameters.
Within EG, at T2, there was increased PI (p=0.027) and BI (p=0.019) along with improvements in SA (p=0.0002), and DSI (p=0.023). No other changes were observed. At T2, there was no change within subjects for any of the investigated outcome measures in CG.
Between the study groups, at T2, participants of EG demonstrated better CE (SA: p<0.0001; VoH: p=0.008) and higher MBF (p=0.0002).
Conclusions: The preliminary results of this RCT confirm that mandibular overdentures on two implants retained by bars with long distal extensions are not an inferior treatment concept to conventional overdentures on ball attachments and may in the short term (1-year) provide functional advantages in terms of CE and MBF.
