El Khamisy Nermeen El Sayed, Emera Radwa M K, Elmanci Thuraya Maher, Aboelez Marwa Ahmed
Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jul 2;25(1):1040. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06425-0.
Traditional complete denture (CD) design and fabrication techniques need several clinical and laboratory steps. To improve the qualities of denture base material and get rid of all the problems that come with the conventional fabrication process, novel production methods were approved. In the field of denture manufacture, new materials and computer-aided technology have been explored as potential solutions. So, this study aimed to investigate the effect of two different digital construction techniques of implant-assisted overdentures on peri-implant and posterior mandibular bone resorptions by CBCT.
Twenty patients who received mandibular overdenture constructed by different construction techniques were classified equally and randomly into two groups (n = 10 per group): Group M: received milled mandibular overdenture opposed by maxillary complete denture. Group P: received 3D-printed mandibular overdenture opposed by maxillary complete denture. Peri-implant bone loss and posterior ridge resorption were assessed at baseline (T0), at 1 year(T1), and 3 years(T3) by superimposition of pre and post-treatment CBCT.The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to access data that was not normally distributed. Two distinct groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney test. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare paired groups.
Regarding vertical bone loss(VBL), Group P recorded higher VBL in comparison to Group M, where the mean was 0.57 ± 0.13, and 0.52 ± 0.12respectively, at T1 and 0.66 ± 0.11, 0.60 ± 0.12 at T3. There was a statistically significant difference at different times of evaluation within the groups where (P < 0.001). Regarding posterior ridge resorption(PRR), Group P recorded higher PRR in comparison to Group M, where the mean was 381 ± 18.5, 333 ± 17.2 respectively at T1and 533 ± 24.9, 478.5 ± 12.3 at T3. There was a statistically significant difference at different times of evaluation within the groups where (P = 0.005).
Regarding the preservation of peri-implant alveolar bone and posterior ridge bone, milled implant-assisted complete overdentures may have more favorable clinical outcomes compared to 3D printed implant overdentures in the digitally constructed mandibular overdenture bases retained by two implants.
Both milled and 3D printed implant overdenture impression techniques can be used for the construction of CAD/CAM-implant retained overdenture base. However, in regarding the peri-implant alveolar bone and posterior ridge bone resorption, milled implant-assisted complete overdentures may have more favorable clinical outcomes compared to 3D printed implant overdentures retained by two implants.
(No.-NCT06720389) (03/12/2024).
传统全口义齿（CD）的设计和制作技术需要多个临床和实验室步骤。为了提高义齿基托材料的质量并消除传统制作工艺带来的所有问题，新型制作方法得到了认可。在义齿制造领域，新材料和计算机辅助技术已被探索作为潜在解决方案。因此，本研究旨在通过CBCT研究两种不同的种植体支持覆盖义齿数字构建技术对种植体周围和下颌后部骨吸收的影响。
20例接受不同构建技术制作下颌覆盖义齿的患者被平均随机分为两组（每组n = 10）：M组：接受由上颌全口义齿对合的铣削下颌覆盖义齿。P组：接受由上颌全口义齿对合的3D打印下颌覆盖义齿。通过治疗前后CBCT叠加，在基线（T0）、1年（T1）和3年（T3）评估种植体周围骨丢失和后牙嵴吸收。使用Shapiro-Wilk检验来分析非正态分布的数据。使用Mann-Whitney检验比较两个不同组。使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较配对组。
关于垂直骨丢失（VBL），P组记录的VBL高于M组，T1时平均值分别为0.57±0.13和0.52±0.12，T3时为0.66±0.11和0.60±0.12。在组内不同评估时间存在统计学显著差异（P < 0.001）。关于后牙嵴吸收（PRR），P组记录的PRR高于M组，T1时平均值分别为381±18.5和333±17.2，T3时为533±24.9和478.5±12.3。在组内不同评估时间存在统计学显著差异（P = 0.005）。
关于种植体周围牙槽骨和后牙嵴骨的保存，在由两颗种植体固位的数字构建下颌覆盖义齿基托中，铣削的种植体支持全覆盖义齿可能比3D打印的种植体覆盖义齿具有更有利的临床结果。
铣削和3D打印种植体覆盖义齿印模技术均可用于CAD/CAM种植体固位覆盖义齿基托的构建。然而，关于种植体周围牙槽骨和后牙嵴骨吸收，铣削种植体支持全覆盖义齿可能比两颗种植体固位的3D打印种植体覆盖义齿具有更有利的临床结果。
（编号 - NCT06720389）（2024年12月3日）。
