Retention and load transfer characteristics of implant-retained auricular prostheses
- PMID: 17622002
Retention and load transfer characteristics of implant-retained auricular prostheses
Abstract
Purpose: The use of osseointegrated implants for maxillofacial prostheses reduces the need for adhesives, provides for a more stable and more esthetic prosthesis with thinner margins, and results in increased patient acceptance and confidence. The purpose of this study was to compare the retention and load transfer characteristics of differently designed implant-retained auricular prostheses.
Materials and methods: A photoelastic model was fabricated of the auricular-temporal region of a human skull. Craniofacial implants 3.75 mm in diameter and 4 mm long were embedded in locations typically selected to retain auricular prostheses. Two retention mechanisms were evaluated on the implants: a Hader bar with 3 clips and the use of 3 Locator attachments. The retentive capacity of the prostheses was determined on an Instron test machine. Initial retention and changes with multiple removals were examined. Dislodgment forces were applied to each retentive device in the field of a circular polariscope. Resulting stresses were monitored and recorded photographically.
Results: The highest initial retention demonstrated by the Locator device was 12.4 +/- 0.9 lb, and the highest retention value for the Hader bar with clips was 7.5 +/- 1.1 lb. All attachments decreased in retention after multiple removals. The Locator devices produced higher peri-implant stresses compared to the Hader bar-with-clips design.
Conclusions: Since higher retention is associated with higher stresses, results of this study suggest that a balance between retention and stress production is necessary in selecting a retention mechanism for the specific requirements of the patient being treated. The Locator attachment was correlated with higher retention values as well as with higher peri-implant stress compared to the Hader bar-and-clip attachment design. Retention decreased and then stabilized after multiple
Similar articles
-
Photoelastic stress analysis of various retention mechanisms on 3-implant-retained mandibular overdentures.J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Apr;97(4):229-35. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2007.02.006. J Prosthet Dent. 2007. PMID: 17499093
-
Photoelastic analysis of the effect of palatal support on various implant-supported overdenture designs.J Prosthet Dent. 2004 May;91(5):421-7. doi: 10.1016/S0022391304000927. J Prosthet Dent. 2004. PMID: 15153848
-
The change in retentive values of locator attachments and hader clips over time.J Prosthodont. 2009 Aug;18(6):479-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00474.x. Epub 2009 Jun 3. J Prosthodont. 2009. PMID: 19500236
-
Implant-supported facial prostheses.J Mich Dent Assoc. 1996 Apr-May;78(4):50-4, 56-64. J Mich Dent Assoc. 1996. PMID: 9520655 Review.
-
Prosthesis auricular with osseointegrated implants and quality of life.J Craniofac Surg. 2010 Jan;21(1):94-6. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181c4651a. J Craniofac Surg. 2010. PMID: 20061968 Review.
Cited by
-
Psychosocial and quality of life outcomes of prosthetic auricular rehabilitation with CAD/CAM technology.Int J Dent. 2014;2014:393571. doi: 10.1155/2014/393571. Epub 2014 Mar 31. Int J Dent. 2014. PMID: 24799904 Free PMC article.
-
The Survival Rate of the Retention System for Extraoral Maxillofacial Prosthetic Implant: A Systematic Review.Cureus. 2024 Oct 2;16(10):e70705. doi: 10.7759/cureus.70705. eCollection 2024 Oct. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 39493186 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Retention of bar clip attachment for mandibular implant overdenture.BMC Oral Health. 2022 Jun 9;22(1):227. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02262-7. BMC Oral Health. 2022. PMID: 35681163 Free PMC article.
-
Applications of CAD/CAM Technology for Craniofacial Implants Placement and Manufacturing of Auricular Prostheses-Systematic Review.J Clin Med. 2023 Sep 13;12(18):5950. doi: 10.3390/jcm12185950. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37762891 Free PMC article. Review.