Department of Prosthodontics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Mar-Apr;26(2):415-26.
The mandibular two-implant overdenture has been shown to be a highly successful treatment. However, overdenture patients who desire a fixed prosthesis may not be satisfied with a removable overdenture. This prospective study sought to compare prosthetic outcomes, patient satisfaction, and survival rates of implants between two-implant-supported overdentures (IODs) and three-implant-supported fixed dentures (ISFDs).
Twenty completely edentulous patients were randomly and equally assigned to two groups. New conventional complete dentures were made, and the mandibular denture was used as a surgical guide during implant placement. Implants were placed in one stage, followed by a mandibular denture soft reline (provisional loading). Ball attachments were inserted at 8 weeks, and ISFDs were delivered at 16 weeks. IODs were connected to the attachments at 8 weeks, using each patients's existing denture. The definitive ISFDs were fabricated using computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture milled titanium frameworks and acrylic resin base and teeth. Patient satisfaction and panoramic radiographs were investigated at 6 and 12 months.
Both treatments had significant and positive effects on patient satisfaction and quality of life. None of the 50 implants placed had failed at 12 months of follow-up; therefore, the implant survival rate was 100%. Prosthetic complications were generally rare and easily manageable.
Both the treatment modalities-the ISFD supported by three implants and the IOD supported by two implants-significantly and similarly improved patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life, and prosthetic complications were relatively rare for both treatments. Three implants can be used to support a mandibular fixed prosthesis; however, a longer observation period is needed to validate this treatment modality.
下颌种植覆盖义齿已被证明是一种非常成功的治疗方法。然而,希望使用固定义齿的覆盖义齿患者可能对可摘覆盖义齿不满意。本前瞻性研究旨在比较两种种植体支持的覆盖义齿(IOD)和三种种植体支持的固定义齿(ISFD)的修复效果、患者满意度和种植体存活率。
将 20 名完全无牙的患者随机平均分为两组。制作新的常规全口义齿,下颌义齿用作种植体放置的手术导板。一期植入种植体,随后进行下颌义齿软衬(临时负载)。8 周时插入球附着体,16 周时交付 ISFD。8 周时,使用每个患者现有的义齿将 IOD 连接到附着体上。使用计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制造铣削钛框架和丙烯酸树脂基底和牙齿制作最终的 ISFD。在 6 和 12 个月时进行患者满意度和全景 X 光检查。
两种治疗方法均对患者满意度和生活质量产生显著积极影响。在 12 个月的随访中,没有任何 50 个植入物失败;因此,种植体存活率为 100%。修复体并发症通常很少且易于处理。
三种种植体支持的 ISFD 和两种种植体支持的 IOD 这两种治疗方式均显著且相似地提高了患者满意度和口腔健康相关生活质量,两种治疗方法的修复体并发症都相对较少。三颗种植体可用于支撑下颌固定义齿;然而,需要更长的观察期来验证这种治疗方式。