The objective of this research was to clinically compare peri-implant tissue health of bar-clips vs silicone-resilient liners used with bilateral posterior bars for retaining 4 implant-supported mandibular overdentures. Thirty completely edentulous male patients (mean age, 65 years) were randomly assigned into 2 equal groups. Each patient received 4 implants in the canine and first molar regions of the mandible using a flapless surgical technique. Mandibular overdentures were immediately connected to the implants with bilateral prefabricated instant adjusting bars. According to the method of retention to the bar, 1 group was retained with clips (GI), whereas the other group was retained with a silicone-resilient soft liner (GII). Peri-implant tissue health was evaluated clinically in terms of plaque scores (MPI), bleeding scores (MBI), probing depth (PD), and implant stability (IS). MPI, MBI, and PD were measured at mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual surfaces of each implant. Evaluations were performed 2 weeks (T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) after overdenture insertion. Implants of GI with clips demonstrated significant increase in plaque, bleeding, and PD scores compared with those of GII with silicone-resilient liner at all observation times. Implants in GI demonstrated a significant decrease in implant stability compared with those of GII at T6 and T12 anteriorly and at T12 posteriorly. Resilient liners are considered better than bar-clips when used with bilateral posterior bars for retaining implant-supported mandibular overdentures in terms of peri-implant soft tissue health. Bilateral posterior ready-made bars cannot be proposed as a promising design for supporting implant-assisted mandibular overdentures.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectivesThe purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate effect of implant location on initial retention values of palateless complete overdentures retained by four o-rings at different inter-implant distances.Material and MethodsTwo standard acrylic models representing completely edentulous maxillary arches were used. Four single piece ball type implants were placed in each model. Models were divided into two groups according to the distance between anterior and posterior implants. Two canine implants with 32 mm inter-implant distance were placed in both models. In one model (G1), two posterior implants were placed in second premolar region away from canine implants by 14 mm on both sides, while in the other model (G2), the two posterior implants were placed in first molar region away from canine implants by 22 mm on both sides. Eighteen palateless complete overdentures were constructed for each model. Overdentures were retained by four o-rings. Initial axial (central), and para-axial (anterior, posterior, and lateral) retention values of overdentures were estimated and compared using a universal testing machine.ResultsIndependent t-test revealed that implant location has a significant role in palateless complete overdenture retention with a level of significance set at P < 0.05.ConclusionsFor in vitro simulated palateless implant overdentures retained by four o-rings, increasing the inter-implant distance between anterior and posterior implants is favourable for a more retentive prosthesis.

No abstract