Moustafa Abdou ELsyad1, Waleed Hamed Maryod2, Aisha Zakaria Mostafa1,3. 1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Mansoura, Eldakahlia, Egypt. 2. Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Modern Science and Arts, Cairo, Egypt. 3. Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hail, Hail, Saudia Arabia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of implant position on clinical and radiographic outcomes of Locator-retained mandibular overdentures MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen edentulous participants with compromised bone at canine regions of the mandible were given 2 implants in the premolar areas (study group, PM). The control group (CA) consisted of 15 participants who received 2 implants in the canine regions, matched to PM and assigned as historical control. For study and control groups, mandibular dentures were constructed and attached to the fixtures with Locator attachments using the delayed loading protocol. Clinical (plaque scores, gingival scores, pocket depth, and implant stability) and radiographic (marginal bone loss) outcomes were assessed after denture delivery (T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) later. RESULTS: The survival rate was 100% in both groups. All clinical and radiographic parameters increased significantly with time. No significant difference in plaque scores, gingival scores, or implant stability between groups was observed. PM group recorded significantly higher pocket depth and marginal bone loss than CA group at T6 and T12. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this short-term clinical study, canine position for implants retaining mandibular overdentures with Locator attachments is preferred over the first premolar position, as it was associated with reduced peri-implant pocket depth and marginal bone loss after 1 year.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of implant position on clinical and radiographic outcomes of Locator-retained mandibular overdentures MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen edentulous participants with compromised bone at canine regions of the mandible were given 2 implants in the premolar areas (study group, PM). The control group (CA) consisted of 15 participants who received 2 implants in the canine regions, matched to PM and assigned as historical control. For study and control groups, mandibular dentures were constructed and attached to the fixtures with Locator attachments using the delayed loading protocol. Clinical (plaque scores, gingival scores, pocket depth, and implant stability) and radiographic (marginal bone loss) outcomes were assessed after denture delivery (T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12) later. RESULTS: The survival rate was 100% in both groups. All clinical and radiographic parameters increased significantly with time. No significant difference in plaque scores, gingival scores, or implant stability between groups was observed. PM group recorded significantly higher pocket depth and marginal bone loss than CA group at T6 and T12. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this short-term clinical study, canine position for implants retaining mandibular overdentures with Locator attachments is preferred over the first premolar position, as it was associated with reduced peri-implant pocket depth and marginal bone loss after 1 year.