The effect of ball versus locator attachment system on the performance of implant supported overdenture: A systematic review
- PMID: 36406295
- PMCID: PMC9673099
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2022.11.001
The effect of ball versus locator attachment system on the performance of implant supported overdenture: A systematic review
Abstract
Objective: This systematic review was aimed to compare ball and locator attachment system on the basis of clinical and biomechanical performance of implant supported overdenture as well as biological and patient related outcomes.
Material and methods: Open and free electronic and manual searches were performed in digital databases including MEDLINE via PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials, and Scopus along with some other reliable sources. From the 667 retrieved records, 11 full-text controlled trials were included in this study. Risk of bias was assessed according to RoB 2.0 except for one RCT (economic evaluation), only assessed by CASP checklist.
Results: From the 11 retrieved studies, total 183 locator and 219 ball attachments were identified in 452 subjects of 30 yrs-95 yrs of age. Studies provided data about prosthodontic complications or maintenance (replacement or the activation of matrix and patrix part, loss of retention, fracture and relining of the prosthesis, fracture of the attachment and the survival probability), oral health impact profile, soft tissue parameters and periodontal complications, marginal bone loss, patient related outcome and cost of the attachment systems. Only 5 studies were assessed at low risk bias, while other 6 at moderate to high risk of bias.
Conclusion: Locator attachment system show lesser complications including loss of retention and lower maintenance appointments, lesser soft tissue, and periodontal complications than the ball attachment. Ball is better in terms of cost effectiveness. In other related outcomes, no significant differences were noted between ball and locator attachment.
Keywords: Attachment system; Ball attachment; Implant retained overdenture; Locator attachment; Prosthodontic complications.
© 2022 The Authors.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Figures
References
-
- Tallgren A. The continuing reduction of the residual alveolar ridges in complete denture wearers: a mixed-longitudinal study covering 25 years. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;27:120–132. - PubMed
-
- MacEntee M.I., Walton J.N., Glick N. A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three-year results. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:28–37. - PubMed
-
- Awad M.A., Rashid F., Feine J.S., et al. The effect of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on oral health-related quality of life: an international multicentre study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:46–51. - PubMed
-
- Carlsson G.E. Responses of jawbone to pressure. Gerodontology. 2004;21:65–70. - PubMed
-
- Martín-Ares M., Barona-Dorado C., Guisado-Moya B., Martínez-Rodríguez N., Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann J., Martínez-González J.M. Prosthetic hygiene and functional efficacy in completely edentulous patients: satisfaction and quality of life during a 5-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27:1500–1505. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources