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 Jun 19;11(12):3524.
doi: 10.3390/jcm11123524.

Immediate versus Delayed Attachment Incorporation Impact on Prosthetic Aftercare among Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdenture Wearers

Eran Zenziper  1 , Ofir Rosner  1 , Oded Ghelfan  1 , Joseph Nissan  1 , Sigalit Blumer  2 , Gil Ben-Izhack  1 , Moshe Davidovich  3 , Liat Chaushu  4 , Adrian Kahn  5 , Sarit Naishlos  2
Affiliations

Immediate versus Delayed Attachment Incorporation Impact on Prosthetic Aftercare among Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdenture Wearers

Eran Zenziper et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background: Substantial effort is dedicated to finding the most favorable parameters that will ensure low aftercare demands among edentulous patients wearing mandibular implant supported overdentures (MISODs). The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare prosthetic aftercare between MISOD patients with a simultaneous (group A) vs. a three-week settling in period (group B) prior to attachment incorporation.

Methods: Forty-five patients enrolled in this study. Two implants per patient were placed using a two-stage implant insertion protocol. Second-stage surgery was performed after three months. All patients received ball attachments using the direct (chairside) incorporation method. Twenty-two patients received their dentures with simultaneous attachment activation and the rest-twenty-three patients-after a three-week settling in period. Patients' files were scanned for aftercare visits. Outcome parameters included sore spot relief, attachment incorporation, and denture repair. Additionally, gingival index measurements were compared. Confounding factors included age, gender, and implant dimensions.

Results: The mean follow-up for the entire cohort was 84 ± 21 months, and the range 39-120 months. The mean number of visits for group A vs. B respectively: pressure sores relieve (3.63 ± 0.84 vs. 3.71 ± 0.61, p = 0.581), liner exchange due to loss of retention (2.09 ± 1.03 vs. 2.31 ± 1.04 p = 0.487), and gingival index (1.3 ± 0.3 vs. 1.03 ± 0.2, p = 0.653) exhibited no statistically significant differences between the tested groups. No statistically significant differences between the groups were also noted for the denture repair aftercare treatments (p = 0.318) and the independent variables including age, gender, and implant length.

Conclusions: Prosthetic aftercare in MISOD wearers is similar whether a simultaneous or a three-week settling in period for attachment incorporation is applied.

Keywords: aftercare; delayed activation; denture settling; immediate activation; mandibular implant overdenture.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Two ball attachments connected to supporting implants.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Silicone liner and metal housing.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a). Intraoral components before direct (chairside) attachment incorporation. (b). Denture base before direct (chairside) attachment incorporation. (c). Denture base after direct (chairside) attachment incorporation.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Panoramic X-ray. Post-operative, 60 months’ follow-up.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The mean number of visits dedicated to pressure sores relieve (p = 0.581).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Liner exchange due to loss of retention (p = 0.487).
Figure 7
Figure 7
The mean Gingival index (p = 0.653).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tyrovolas S., Koyanagi A., Panagiotakos D.B., Haro J.M., Kassebaum N.J., Chrepa V., Kotsakis G.A. Population prevalence of edentulism and its association with depression and self-rated health. Sci. Rep. 2016;6:37083. doi: 10.1038/srep37083. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization . International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2001.
    1. Feine J.S., Carlsson G.E., Awad M.A., Chehade A., Duncan W.J., Gizani S., Head T., Lund J.P., MacEntee M., Mericske-Stern R., et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Gerodontology. 2002;19:3–4. - PubMed
    1. Assaf A., Daas M., Boittin A., Eid N., Postaire M. Prosthetic maintenance of different mandibular implant overdentures: A systematic review. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2017;118:144–152. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.037. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krennmair G., Seemann R., Fazekas A., Ewers R., Piehslinger E. Patient Preference and Satisfaction with Implant-Supported Mandibular Overdentures Retained with Ball or Locator Attachments: A Crossover Clinical Trial. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2012;27:1560–1568. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources