A review of the recent literature on maxillary overdenture with dental implants

Abstract

The recent literature on maxillary implant overdenture (IOD) was reviewed in order to clarify its predictability and establish treatment guidelines. Electronic searches were performed using PubMed, and articles about maxillary IOD written after 1990 were reviewed, focusing on the following items: I. implant survival rate, II. maxillary IOD survival rate, III. number of implants, IV. attachment type, V. follow-up period, VI. implant system, and VII. opposing dentition. The review revealed an implant survival rate of 61-100% and an overdenture survival rate of 72.4-100%. The attachments used included bars, balls, locators, and telescope crowns. The minimum and maximum observation periods were 12 months and 120 months, respectively, and the number of implants used for supporting IOD ranged from 2 to 8. At present, there is no strong evidence to indicate that maxillary IOD is clearly superior for all the items examined. However, the existing data indicate that maxillary IOD has almost the same therapeutic effect as fixed implant superstructures, and is a treatment option that can be actively adopted for patients in whom fixed superstructures cannot be applied for various reasons.

Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla With All-on-Four Hybrid Prosthesis and Bar-Clip Retained Overdenture in Patients With Mandibular Hybrid Prostheses: Clinical, Radiographic, and Prosthetic Outcomes

“…The use of implants to support overdentures is an option for people who couldn't afford full-arch hybrid prostheses or who have speech or cosmetic issues such as decreased lip support, increased inter-arch space, and poor jaw relationship. 18,19 Another advantage of overdentures over hybrid prostheses is the possibility of removing them at night to reduce bruxism concerns. Also, the screw-retained nature of hybrid prostheses and the presence of prosthetic flanges make it harder for patients to perform oral hygiene measures.…”