Carine Matthys1, Stijn Vervaeke2, Wolfgang Jacquet3, Hugo De Bruyn4. 1. Deputy Head, Clinic for Removable Prosthodontics, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. Electronic address: carine.matthys@ugent.be. 2. Specialist, Periodontics and Implantology, Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 3. Professor, Applied Mathematics-Statistics, Department of Oral Health Sciences, and Department of Educational Sciences Localities Ontologies Commons Integrated, University of Amsterdam Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; and Lecturer, Anton de Kom University of Suriname, Paramaribo, Suriname; and Research consultant, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 4. Specialist, Periodontics and Implantology, Professor and Chairman, Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; and visiting professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; Department Head, Department of Dentistry, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The influence of the mandibular resorption profile on clinical outcome after converting a conventional complete denture into a Locator-retained implant overdenture is unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and prosthetic maintenance of mandibular overdentures on 2 Locator abutments in relation to the resorption degree of the edentulous mandible. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five participants were treated and classified according to the Cawood and Howell (CAW-H) resorption classification for the resorption profile of the mandible, CAW-H group III-IV (n=14) and CAW-H group V (n=11). Participants received conventional complete dentures (CDs) before implant placement and immediate nonfunctional loading on Locators with a resilient liner. After 3 months, the attachments were functionally activated. Assessments were made using the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14) questionnaires with existing CDs and new CDs at 1, 3, and 15 months after loading. Prosthetic maintenance (repairs, rebasings, replacement of retention parts) and biological prosthetic aftercare were assessed. For comparison between groups, the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were applied for continuous and ordinal variables and the chi-square test for cross-tabulations. To analyze repeated OHIP-14 scores, the Friedman test was used for ordered alternatives to test whether the measurements differed (overall significance level α=.05). Then the Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted to detect specific differences (α=.05). RESULTS: OHIP-14 scores decreased significantly after implant placement and functional connection for the whole population (P<.001) and for both sub groups, the CAW-H group III-IV (P<.001) and the CAW-H group V (P=.013). CAW-H group V participants needed more retention inserts than CAW-H group III-IV participants (26 versus 3, respectively; P=.006). The incidence of repair and rebasing was limited for both groups, and biological aftercare and pain relief were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Changing a CD to an overdenture significantly improved ORLQoL regardless of the resorption degree, but heavily resorbed mandibles require more replacements of retention inserts.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The influence of the mandibular resorption profile on clinical outcome after converting a conventional complete denture into a Locator-retained implant overdenture is unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and prosthetic maintenance of mandibular overdentures on 2 Locator abutments in relation to the resorption degree of the edentulous mandible. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five participants were treated and classified according to the Cawood and Howell (CAW-H) resorption classification for the resorption profile of the mandible, CAW-H group III-IV (n=14) and CAW-H group V (n=11). Participants received conventional complete dentures (CDs) before implant placement and immediate nonfunctional loading on Locators with a resilient liner. After 3 months, the attachments were functionally activated. Assessments were made using the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14) questionnaires with existing CDs and new CDs at 1, 3, and 15 months after loading. Prosthetic maintenance (repairs, rebasings, replacement of retention parts) and biological prosthetic aftercare were assessed. For comparison between groups, the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were applied for continuous and ordinal variables and the chi-square test for cross-tabulations. To analyze repeated OHIP-14 scores, the Friedman test was used for ordered alternatives to test whether the measurements differed (overall significance level α=.05). Then the Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted to detect specific differences (α=.05). RESULTS: OHIP-14 scores decreased significantly after implant placement and functional connection for the whole population (P<.001) and for both sub groups, the CAW-H group III-IV (P<.001) and the CAW-H group V (P=.013). CAW-H group V participants needed more retention inserts than CAW-H group III-IV participants (26 versus 3, respectively; P=.006). The incidence of repair and rebasing was limited for both groups, and biological aftercare and pain relief were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Changing a CD to an overdenture significantly improved ORLQoL regardless of the resorption degree, but heavily resorbed mandibles require more replacements of retention inserts.