Moustafa Abdou ELsyad1, Nelly Ibrahim Hammouda2. 1. Faculty of Dentistry, Associate Professor, Removable Prosthodontics, Department of Removable Prosthodontic, Mansoura University, Eldakahlia, Egypt. 2. Associate Professor of Oral Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Egypt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of two implants placed in expanded mandibular knife-edge ridge and implants placed in unexpanded ridges to retain overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen completely edentulous patients with knife-edge ridges at canine areas of the mandible received two implants using the ridge expansion technique (study group, SG). Expansion was performed using piezoelectric corticotomy, and self-threading expanders. The control group (CG) comprised patients who received two-implant at canine areas without ridge expansion but were all case matched to SG and served as historical cohort. In both groups, mandibular overdentures were connected to the implants with Locator attachments 3 months after implant placement. Clinical (Plaque index; PI, Gingival index; GI, Probing depth; PD, and implant stability; ISQ) and radiographic (Vertical bone loss; VBL) parameters were recorded at time of overdenture insertion (base line, T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) after insertion. RESULTS: The cumulative success rates were 100% and 96.4% for CG and SG, respectively, without significant difference between groups. All tested parameters increased significantly with advance of time in both groups. There was no significant difference in PI, GI, PD, and ISQ between groups. However, SG recorded significant higher VBL than CG at T6 and T12. CONCLUSION: Expansion of mandibular knife edge ridge and simultaneous placement of implants to retain overdentures is associated with clinic and radiographic outcomes comparable to implants placed in unexpanded ridges after 1 year. However, long term randomized controlled trials with sufficient sample size are still needed to ensure the findings of the present study.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of two implants placed in expanded mandibular knife-edge ridge and implants placed in unexpanded ridges to retain overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen completely edentulouspatients with knife-edge ridges at canine areas of the mandible received two implants using the ridge expansion technique (study group, SG). Expansion was performed using piezoelectric corticotomy, and self-threading expanders. The control group (CG) comprised patients who received two-implant at canine areas without ridge expansion but were all case matched to SG and served as historical cohort. In both groups, mandibular overdentures were connected to the implants with Locator attachments 3 months after implant placement. Clinical (Plaque index; PI, Gingival index; GI, Probing depth; PD, and implant stability; ISQ) and radiographic (Vertical bone loss; VBL) parameters were recorded at time of overdenture insertion (base line, T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) after insertion. RESULTS: The cumulative success rates were 100% and 96.4% for CG and SG, respectively, without significant difference between groups. All tested parameters increased significantly with advance of time in both groups. There was no significant difference in PI, GI, PD, and ISQ between groups. However, SG recorded significant higher VBL than CG at T6 and T12. CONCLUSION: Expansion of mandibular knife edge ridge and simultaneous placement of implants to retain overdentures is associated with clinic and radiographic outcomes comparable to implants placed in unexpanded ridges after 1 year. However, long term randomized controlled trials with sufficient sample size are still needed to ensure the findings of the present study.