Clinical guidelines and procedures for provision of mandibular overdentures on 4 mini-dental implants

Kanazawa, Manabu; Feine, Jocelyne; Esfandiari, Shahrokh

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.020

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The manufacturers recommend preparation of one‐ to two‐thirds of MDI length with narrower drills (with the addition of the height of mucosal tissue). Kanazawa et al () recommend penetrating one‐third to one‐half of the implant height into bone and by using a thumb wrench and a ratchet the implant is self‐driven into bone (it acts as a self‐tapping screw). However, preparation length is dependent on bone density.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The MDI insertion usually requires minimally invasive flapless surgical techniques. They can be immediately loaded when good primary stability is achieved (Disha et al, ; Griffitts, Collins, & Collins, ; Kanazawa, Feine, & Esfandiari, ; Kovačić et al, ). Usually, four MDIs are inserted in the interforaminal region for mandibular OD retention (Christensen & Swift, ; Davarpanah, Martinez, Tecucianu, Celletti, & Lazzara, ; Griffitts et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

Kovačić

Peršić

Kranjčić

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess peri‐implant bone level, survival and success rates of short (6 or 8 mm long) one‐piece mini‐implants (MDIs) in edentulous patients with extremely resorbed alveolar ridge (interforaminal height <10 mm) rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures and to compare them with patients having standard length MDIs in 1‐year prospective clinical study. Material and methods The Short MDI group consisted of 28 participants with interforaminal height ≤10 mm. Implants being, both, short and slim (short MDIs: 6 or 8 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide) were inserted. The Standard‐MDI group included 35 participants (interforaminal height >13 mm) who received standard length MDIs (10–14 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide). Primary outcomes were assessments of MDI peri‐implant bone level, survival and success rates; secondary outcomes were assessments of peri‐implant tissue, oral hygiene, and prosthodontic maintenance. Results The Short MDI group had mean marginal bone loss (MBL) of 0.26 ± 0.35 mm, 6.4% of failure, and 92.6% of, both, success and survival rates. The Standard‐MDI group had mean MBL of 0.34 ± 0.40 mm, 5% of failure, 95% of survival, and 94.3% success. There were no significant differences in MBL (p = .420), survival (p = .414), and success (p = .571) between the groups. The Short MDI group had significantly less plaque (p = .001) and bleeding on probing (p < .001). Conclusion Within the limitations of this study, short MDIs (6 or 8 mm long) in extremely atrophied mandibles (interforaminal height <10 mm) showed good clinical results in the first year of function.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

Kovačić

Peršić

Kranjčić

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stabilizing the conventional dentures by mini implants was clearly described and documented as a definitive treatment. [1][2][3] Article reviews concluded that mini implants could be used safely to retain removable prosthesis, especially if all other parameters such as bone quality, anatomical locations, protective occlusal schemes are maintained. Because of their merits, it was not surprising to have an encouraging value (94.7%) of survival rate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal Bone Level Changes and Oral Health Impact Profile (14) Score of Smokers Treated by Mandibular Mini Implant Overdentures: A 5-Year Follow-up Study

Hussein

Alruthea

2020

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Studies considered edentulous patients having smoking habit as a compromised oral condition. This research examined the value of using mini implant mandibular overdenture to maintain long-term satisfactory levels of oral health quality of life and marginal vertical bone loss. Materials and Methods Twenty-nine edentulous patients with smoking habit received four mini implants in the mandible loaded by overdentures. The present study monitored patients radiographically for vertical bone loss after (1 month, 1, 3, and 5 years) of treatment. Patients were also evaluated by oral health impact profile 14 (OHIP-14) pretreatment and at 1 and 5 years of treatment. Statistical Analysis Repeated measure analysis of variance with Bonferroni’s test as a post-hoc test was used to see the difference among time points. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare between anterior and posterior mini implant positions after 5 years of follow-up. OHIP-14 questionnaire was analyzed by Wilcoxon signed ranks for pairwise comparisons at different evaluation times. A Holm-Bonferroni correction method was used to control the familywise error rate. Results The mean of the bone height changes showed a significant difference between 1-month data and all other evaluation intervals while no significance was calculated among other evaluation intervals. Bone loss of the mini implants placed anteriorly was less than those placed posteriorly with a statistically significant difference. A significant reduction in the OHIP-14 score levels was observed between pretreatment and both 1 and 5 years of treatment. No significance was seen between the first and fifth year after treatment. Conclusion Mini implant overdenture could maintain satisfactory marginal bone level changes and oral health quality of life for patients with smoking habit after 5-year follow-up period.

show abstract

“…Bei 2 Miniimplantaten (MDI) in der Mandibula wiesen primär verblockte Implantate eine bessere Überlebensrate und weniger marginalen Knochenverlust als sekundär verblockt auf [7,8]. Bei 4 interforaminalen MDI unter Sofortbelastung ergaben sich sehr gute Implantaterfolgsraten auch bei sekundärer Verblockung [9], wobei eine Implantatprimärstabilität von lediglich 20 Ncm auszureichen scheint [10]. Die Versorgung der zahnlosen Mandibula über eine 4 MDI-Kugel-Overdenture oder einen 2-Implantat-Steg auf Standardimplantaten ist nach aktueller Datenlage als ein sicheres Sofortbelastungskonzept zu bewerten.…”

Section: Norbert Enklingunclassified

Die Soforttherapien in der Implantologie: Sofortimplantation, Sofortversorgung und Sofortbelastung

Enkling¹

2019

ZWR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical guidelines and procedures for provision of mandibular overdentures on 4 mini-dental implants

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

Marginal Bone Level Changes and Oral Health Impact Profile (14) Score of Smokers Treated by Mandibular Mini Implant Overdentures: A 5-Year Follow-up Study

Die Soforttherapien in der Implantologie: Sofortimplantation, Sofortversorgung und Sofortbelastung

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About