EVALUATION OF IMPLANT-ASSISTED MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURE WITH NEW METAL TO METAL INTERFACE ATTACHMENT SYSTEM (IN VITRO STUDY)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Demonstrator of Removable prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University.

2 Professor of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University.

3 Associate Professor of Material Science and Engineering, School of Innovative Design Engineering, Egypt- Japan University of Science and Technology (E-Just).

Abstract

Introduction: A well-constructed two-implant-assisted mandibular overdenture can be a successful treatment option for completely edentulous patients as it helps improving the oral function and patient satisfaction through elimination of the fear of dislodgment during speech or mastication. Various attachment systems can be used for retaining mandibular overdentures such as bar, ball and socket, OT equator and locators. A new attachment system with metal to metal interface named Titach has evolved. During mastication, loads are transferred to alveolar bone surrounding the implants.
Objectives: This study was done to compare the stress transmitted to peri-implant tissues of implant-assisted mandibular overdenture using two different attachment designs; Titach attachment and locator attachment.
Materials and methods: A completely edentulous epoxy resin mandibular model was used in which two parallel dental implants were inserted at the canine region bilaterally. Sixteen mandibular implant-assisted overdentures were constructed forming two groups; each with different attachment design. Group I received 8 pairs of Titach attachment, while group II received 8 pairs of locator attachment. The difference in stress distribution was measured using strain gauges and compared between the two studied groups. Vertical load and oblique load (30o and 45o) of 50 and 100 N using the universal testing machine were applied bilaterally on the central occlusal fossae of mandibular first molars.
Results:There was no significant difference between group I and II upon application of vertical loading 50, 100N and 30o oblique loading 50 N. However, group I showed lower strain values upon application of 30o oblique loading 100N, 45o oblique loading 50N and 100N.
Conclusions: Titach attachment with metal to metal interface showed less strain values with favourable stress distribution when compared to zest anchor locator attachment with nylon interface for implant-assisted mandibular overdenture.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Kaur P. Implant Supported Overdenture: A Case Report. Periodontics. 2016; 2(2):13.
  2. Glossary of implant dentistry III. International congress of oral implantologists; 2017.
  3. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures: mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Montreal, Quebec, May 24–25, 2002. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17:601–2.
  4. Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, et al. Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients-the York Consensus Statement.Br Dent J. 2009; 207(4): 185-6.
  5. Zest Dental Solutions. http://www.zestdent.com. Accessed March 15, 2018
  6. Evtimovska E, Masri R, Driscoll CF, Romberg E. The change in retentive values of Locator Attachments and Hader clips over time. J. Prosthodont. 2009; 18:479–83
  7. Büttel AE, Bühler NM, Marinello CP. Locator or ball attachment: a guide for clinical decision making [in French, German]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2009; 119:901 18.
  8. Cakarer S, Can T, Yaltirik M, keskin C. Complications associated with the ball, bar and LOCATOR attachments for implant-supported overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011; 16:e953-9.
  9. Chikunov I, Doan P, Vahidi F. Implant-retained partial overdenture with resilient attachments. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17:141-8.
  10. Kleis WK, Kämmerer PW, Hartmann S, Al-Nawas B, Wagner W. A comparison of three different attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: one-year report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010; 12:209-18.
  11. Ahuja S, Wicks R, Selecman A. Fabrication of new restorations with a consideration of oral hygiene. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016;16:307-10
  12. Dental Evolutions Inc. https://www.denvolution.com.
  13. Tonella BP, Pellizzer EP, Ferraço R, Falcón-Antenucci RM, Carvalho PS, Goiato MC. Photoelastic analysis of cemented or screwed implant-supported prostheses with different prosthetic connections. J Oral Implantol. 2011; 37:401-10.
  14. Tonella BP, Pellizzer EP, Falcón-Antenucci RM, Ferraço R, de Faria Almeida DA. Photoelastic analysis of biomechanical behavior of single and multiple fixed partial prostheses with different prosthetic connections. J Craniofac Surg. 2011;22:2060-3
  15. Geng JP, Tan KBO, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 85:585-98.
  16. Yoo JS, Kwon KR, Noh K, Lee H, Paek J. Stress analysis of mandibular implant overdenture with locator and bar/clip attachment: comparative study with differences in the denture base length. J Adv Prosthodont 2017; 9:143-51.
  17. Assunção WG1, Barão VA, Tabata LF, Gomes EA, Delben JA, dos Santos PH. Biomechanics studies in dentistry: bioengineering applied in oral implantology. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20(4):1173-7
  18. Sinclair PM, Little RM. Maturation of untreated normal occlusions. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83:114-23
  19. Dahab I, El-Gendy A, Eltorky I. In vitro stress analysis study of different prosthetic options using single posterior implant for management of mandibular unilateral distal extension saddle. Tanta Dent J. 2015;12:7-15
  20. Rismanchian M, Bajoghli F, Mostajeran Z, Fazel A, Eshkevari P. Effect of Implants on Maximum Bite Force in Edentulous Patients. J Oral Implantol. 2009; 35(4):196-200.
  21. Porter JA, Petropoulos VC, Brunski JB. Comparison of load distribution for implant overdenture attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17(5):651-62.
  22. Tokuhisa M, Matsushita Y, Koyano K. In vitro study of a mandibular implant overdenture retained with ball, magnet, or bar attachments: comparison of load transfer and denture stability. Int J Prosthodont. 2003; 16(2):128-34. 
  23. Cekic C, Akca K, Cehreli MC. Effects of attachment designs on strains around implants supporting overdentures. Quintessence Int. 2007;38:291-7
  24. Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips' Science of Dental Materials. 12th ed.: St Louis, United States: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013. Chapter 4, Mechanical Properties of Dental Materials; p.48-68.
  25. Kirkpatrick LA, Feeney BC. A simple guide to IBM SPSS statistics for version 20.0. Student ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning; 2013.
  26. Lee CK, Karl M, Kelly JR. Evaluation of test protocol variables for dental implant fatigue research. Dent Mater 2009; 25(11):1419-25.
  27. Stoker GT, Wismeijer D. Immediate Loading of Two Implants with a Mandibular Implant‐Retained Overdenture: A New Treatment Protocol. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011;13(4):255-61
  28. Georgiopoulos B, Kalioras K, Provatidis C, Manda M, Koidis P. The Effects of Implant Length and Diameter Prior to and After Osseointegration: A 2-D Finite Element Analysis, J Oral Implantol. 2007;33(5):243-56
  29. Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3rd ed.: St Louis, United States: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2008. Chapter 10, Available Bone and Dental Implant Treatment Plans; p.178-99
  30. Asundi A, Kishen A. A strain gauge and photoelastic analysis of in vivo strain and in vitro stress distribution in human dental supporting structures. Arch Oral Biol. 2000; 45(7):543-50.
  31. El-Gendy AA. Micro-strain evaluation of different implant positions supporting mandibular bilateral distal extension partial over denture. Tanta Dental J. 2007; 4(2):39-46.
  32. Akca K, Cehreli MC, Iplikcioglu H. A comparison of three dimensional finite element stress analysis with in vitro strain gauge measurements on dental implants. Int J Prosthodont. 2002; 15(2):115-21.
  33. Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo M, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 100: 422-31.
  34. Sadowsky SJ, Caputo AA. Stress transfer of four mandibular implant overdenture cantilever designs. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 92: 328-336.
  35. Lin CL, Kuo YC, Lin TS. Effects of dental implant length and bone quality on biomechanical responses in bone around implants: a 3-d non-linear finite element analysis. Biomed Eng. 2005;17:44-9 
Alexandria Dental Journal
Volume 45, Issue 1
April 2020
Pages 106-111

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics