Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 22;8(1):8.
doi: 10.1038/s41405-022-00100-0.

Comparative cost analysis of different prosthetic rehabilitations for the edentulous maxilla: early results from a randomized clinical pilot study

Peyman Ghiasi  1 , Sofia Petrén  2 , Bruno Chrcanovic  3 , Christel Larsson  3
Affiliations

Comparative cost analysis of different prosthetic rehabilitations for the edentulous maxilla: early results from a randomized clinical pilot study

Peyman Ghiasi et al. BDJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives/aim: To analyze and compare costs of different prosthetic rehabilitations for the edentulous maxilla.

Materials and methods: Patients with edentulous maxillae were rehabilitated with either of three implant-supported prosthetic protocols; removable overdenture supported by 2 implants (ISOD 2), fixed dental prostheses supported by 4 (ISFAFDP 4) or 6 (ISFAFDP 6) implants. Cost of treatment and costs during follow-up were registered and compared.

Results: Twenty-four patients were included: six patients received ISOD 2 treatment, eight patients received ISFADP 4 treatment and ten patients received ISFADP 6 treatment. Initial costs for ISFAFDP 6 were higher than costs for ISFAFDP 4 and ISOD 2, but there were no differences in cost for maintenance i.e., the ISOD treatment remained the least costly treatment alternative after 1-year follow-up.

Discussion: The lack of difference in cost for maintenance and repair over the first year suggests that implant-supported overdentures will remain the least costly treatment option for the edentulous maxilla, at least in a short-term perspective.

Conclusions: Removable maxillary overdentures supported by 2 implants may be a valid low cost treatment option.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:143–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02039.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nordenram G, Davidson T, Gynther G, Helgesson G, Hultin M, Jemt T, et al. Qualitative studies of patients’ perceptions of loss of teeth, the edentulous state and prosthetic rehabilitation: a systematic review with meta-synthesis. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013;71:937–51. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2012.734421. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Peltzer K, Hewlett S, Yawson AE, Moynihan P, Preet R, Wu F, et al. Prevalence of loss of all teeth (edentulism) and associated factors in older adults in China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia and South Africa. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11:11308–24. doi: 10.3390/ijerph111111308. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bilhan H, Geckili O, Ergin S, Erdogan O, Ates G. Evaluation of satisfaction and complications in patients with existing complete dentures. J Oral Sci. 2013;55:29–37. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.55.29. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yao CJ, Cao C, Bornstein MM, Mattheos N. Patient-reported outcome measures of edentulous patients restored with implant-supported removable and fixed prostheses: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29:241–54. doi: 10.1111/clr.13286. - DOI - PubMed