- Email: [email protected]
Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: A 10-year randomized clinical study
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
6. Abdullah BJ, Teong LK, Mahadevan J, Jalaludin A. Dental prosthesis ingested and impacted in the oesophagus and orolaryngopharynx. J Otolaryngol 1998;27:190-4. 7. Angelopoulos AP. Diphenylhydantoin gingival hyperplasia. A clinicopathological review. 1. Incidence, clinical features and histopathology. J Can Dent Assoc 1975;41:103-6. 8. Angelopoulos AP. Diphenylhydantoin gingival hyperplasia. A clinicopathological review. 2. Aetiology, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis and treatment. J Can Dent Assoc 1975;41:275-7, 283. 9. Dahllof G, Preber H, Eliasson S, Ryden H, Karsten J, Modeer T. Periodontal condition of epileptic adults treated long-term with phenytoin or carbamazepine. Epilepsia 1993;34:960-4. 10. Westphal P. Dental care of epileptics. Epilepsia 1972;13:233-7. 11. Karolyhazy K, Kovacs E, Kivovics P, Fejerdy P, Aranyi Z. Dental status and oral health of patients with epilepsy: an epidemiologic study. Epilepsia 2003;44:1103-8.
Noteworthy Abstracts of the Current Literature
KAROLYHAZY ET AL
Reprint requests to: DR ZSUZSANNA ARA´NYI DEPT. OF NEUROLOGY, FACULTY OF MEDICINE SEMMELWEIS UNIVERSITY BALASSA U. 6, BUDAPEST HUNGARY, 1083 FAX: 36-1-210-1368 E-MAIL: [email protected] 0022-3913/$30.00 Copyright Ó 2005 by The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.008
Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: A 10-year randomized clinical study Naert I, Alsaadi G, Quirynen M. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:401-10.
Purpose. This study aimed to compare the prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with prosthetic care in two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures, whether implants were splinted with a bar or left with magnets or ball attachments. Materials and Methods. Thirty-six completely edentulous patients had two Bra˚nemark implants placed in the mandibular canine area. A randomized procedure allocated patients into three groups of equal size, each with a different attachment system: bars, magnets, or balls. Prosthesis retention and mechanical as well as soft tissue complications were recorded in addition to patient satisfaction. A linear mixed model was fitted with attachment type and time as classification variables and adjusted by Turkey’s multiple range test. Results. Ball-retained overdentures showed at year 10 the greatest vertical retention force (1,327 g), followed by bars (1,067 g) and magnets (219 g). In the ball group, need for tightening of abutment screws was the most common mechanical complication; in the magnet and bar groups, respectively, the most common complications were wear and corrosion, and the need for clip activation. Prosthesis stability and chewing comfort for the overdenture were rated significantly lower for the magnet group compared to the ball and bar groups. Prosthesis stability of the maxillary denture was rated significantly lower in the bar group compared to ball and magnet groups. Conclusion. The ball group scored best in relation to retention of the overdenture, soft tissue complications, and patient satisfaction at year 10. The bar group scored lower for comfort and stability of the maxillary denture. Magnets offered patients the least comfort. —Reprinted with permission of Quintessence Publishing.
182
VOLUME 93 NUMBER 2
6. Abdullah BJ, Teong LK, Mahadevan J, Jalaludin A. Dental prosthesis ingested and impacted in the oesophagus and orolaryngopharynx. J Otolaryngol 1998;27:190-4. 7. Angelopoulos AP. Diphenylhydantoin gingival hyperplasia. A clinicopathological review. 1. Incidence, clinical features and histopathology. J Can Dent Assoc 1975;41:103-6. 8. Angelopoulos AP. Diphenylhydantoin gingival hyperplasia. A clinicopathological review. 2. Aetiology, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis and treatment. J Can Dent Assoc 1975;41:275-7, 283. 9. Dahllof G, Preber H, Eliasson S, Ryden H, Karsten J, Modeer T. Periodontal condition of epileptic adults treated long-term with phenytoin or carbamazepine. Epilepsia 1993;34:960-4. 10. Westphal P. Dental care of epileptics. Epilepsia 1972;13:233-7. 11. Karolyhazy K, Kovacs E, Kivovics P, Fejerdy P, Aranyi Z. Dental status and oral health of patients with epilepsy: an epidemiologic study. Epilepsia 2003;44:1103-8.
Noteworthy Abstracts of the Current Literature
KAROLYHAZY ET AL
Reprint requests to: DR ZSUZSANNA ARA´NYI DEPT. OF NEUROLOGY, FACULTY OF MEDICINE SEMMELWEIS UNIVERSITY BALASSA U. 6, BUDAPEST HUNGARY, 1083 FAX: 36-1-210-1368 E-MAIL: [email protected] 0022-3913/$30.00 Copyright Ó 2005 by The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.008
Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: A 10-year randomized clinical study Naert I, Alsaadi G, Quirynen M. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:401-10.
Purpose. This study aimed to compare the prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with prosthetic care in two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures, whether implants were splinted with a bar or left with magnets or ball attachments. Materials and Methods. Thirty-six completely edentulous patients had two Bra˚nemark implants placed in the mandibular canine area. A randomized procedure allocated patients into three groups of equal size, each with a different attachment system: bars, magnets, or balls. Prosthesis retention and mechanical as well as soft tissue complications were recorded in addition to patient satisfaction. A linear mixed model was fitted with attachment type and time as classification variables and adjusted by Turkey’s multiple range test. Results. Ball-retained overdentures showed at year 10 the greatest vertical retention force (1,327 g), followed by bars (1,067 g) and magnets (219 g). In the ball group, need for tightening of abutment screws was the most common mechanical complication; in the magnet and bar groups, respectively, the most common complications were wear and corrosion, and the need for clip activation. Prosthesis stability and chewing comfort for the overdenture were rated significantly lower for the magnet group compared to the ball and bar groups. Prosthesis stability of the maxillary denture was rated significantly lower in the bar group compared to ball and magnet groups. Conclusion. The ball group scored best in relation to retention of the overdenture, soft tissue complications, and patient satisfaction at year 10. The bar group scored lower for comfort and stability of the maxillary denture. Magnets offered patients the least comfort. —Reprinted with permission of Quintessence Publishing.
182
VOLUME 93 NUMBER 2