Removable dentures with implant support in strategic positions followed for up to 8 years

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze prosthetic maintenance in partially edentulous patients with removable prostheses supported by teeth and strategic implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients with removable partial prostheses and combined tooth-implant support were identified within the time period from 1998 to 2006. One group consisted of 42 patients (planned group) with a reduced residual dentition and in need of removable partial dentures (RPDs) or overdentures in the maxilla and/or mandible. They were admitted consecutively for treatment. Due to missing teeth in strategic important positions, one or two implants were placed to improve symmetrical denture support and retention. The majority of residual teeth exhibited an impaired structural integrity and therefore were provided with root copings for denture retention. A few vital teeth were used for telescopic crowns. The anchorage system for the strategic implants was selected accordingly. A second group of 18 patients (repair group) wearing RPDs with the loss of one abutment tooth due to biologic or mechanical failure was identified. These abutment teeth were replaced by 21 implants, and patients continued to wear their original prostheses. The observation time for planned and repair groups was 12 months to 8 years. All patients followed a regular maintenance schedule. Technical or biologic complications with supporting teeth or implants and prosthetic service were registered regularly. RESULTS: Three maxillary implants were lost after loading and three roots with copings had to be removed. Biologic problems included caries and periodontal/peri-implant infection with a significantly higher incidence in the repair group (P < .05). Technical complications with the dentures were rather frequent in both groups, mostly related to the anchorage system (matrices) of root copings and implants. Maintenance and complications were observed more frequently in the first year after delivery of the denture than in the following 3 years (P < .05). No denture had to be remade. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of a few implants allows for maintaining a compromised residual dentition for support of RPDs. The combination of root and implant support facilitates treatment planning and enhances designing the removable denture. It also proves to be a practical rescue method. Technical problems with the anchorage system were frequent, particularly in the first year after delivery of the dentures.

The use of extraoral implants for distal-extension removable dentures: a clinical evaluation up to 8 years

PURPOSE: This retrospective study reports the clinical outcome following placement of extraoral implants in severely resorbed posterior ridges to support distal-extension removable dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutively treated patients with partially or completely edentulous ridges, with available bone height in the posterior region of 6 mm or less, were included in the study. Implants originally intended for extraoral use (Straumann) were placed in second molar regions and allowed to heal for 4 to 6 months before abutment connection. At recall appointments, the peri-implant hard and soft tissues were evaluated. Complications with implant components, as well as mechanical and structural failures of the prostheses, were recorded. Two-year survival rates were calculated and life table analyses undertaken. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (19 women and 10 men; average age 61.2 years, range, 44 to 75 years) were included in the study. Forty-seven extraoral implants in 26 patients were placed in the second molar site of the mandible. Two extraoral implants in 2 patients failed during the osseointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 91.8%. The mean distance from the extraoral implants to the most distal tooth/implant was 28.1 mm (range, 16.7 to 39.2 mm). Twenty-three extraoral implants were restored with magnets, 18 with ball anchors, and 4 with conical cylinders. Replacement of abutments and retention elements was necessary in 2 patients. Four abutments in 2 patients were disconnected from the restorations. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the employed research design, extraoral implants may be used successfully to provide support for distal-extension removable dentures in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges.

Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Dental erosion

There is some evidence that dental erosion is steadily spreading. To diagnose erosion, dental professionals have to rely on clinical appearance, as there is no device available to detect it. Adequate preventive measures can only be initiated if the different risk factors and potential interactions between them are known. When substance loss, caused by erosive tooth wear, reaches a certain degree, oral rehabilitation becomes necessary. Prior to the most recent decade, the severely eroded dentition could only be rehabilitated by the provision of extensive crown and bridgework or removable dentures. As a result of the improvements in composite restorative materials and in adhesive techniques, it has become possible to rehabilitate eroded dentitions in a less invasive manner.

Design of removable partial dentures: a survey of dental laboratories in Greece

The aim of this study was to compare data on design and fabrication methods of removable partial dentures (RPDs) in two major cities in Greece. A questionnaire was sent to 150 randomly selected dental technicians. The participation rate was 79.3%. The anterior palatal strap, the lingual bar, and the Roach-type clasp arm designs were preferred. Half of the RPDs fabricated were retained using precision attachments. Differences between the two cities were observed in types of major maxillary connectors used, types of attachments and impression materials used, as well as the design of distal-extension RPDs. Postdoctoral education was found to have an impact on RPD fabrication. Despite the differences observed, design and fabrication of RPDs followed commonly used principles.

[Zirconia and removable partial dentures]

The present paper deals with the double crown technique in removable prosthodontics. New ceramic materials like zirconia are increasingly used in combination with CAD/CAM technologies for framework fabrication of fixed prosthesis, tooth- or implant-supported. However, zirconia is also a newly accepted material in removable prosthodontics. It replaces gold alloys for the fabrication of primary telescopic crowns. The Galvanoforming technology is preferably used to fabricate the secondary crowns. The combination of both techniques and materials results in a prosthetic reconstruction of high quality, optimum fit and good biocompatibility.

Removable partial dentures

On one side, prosthodontic reconstructions compensate for the sequelae of negative changes in the oral cavity; on the other side, they often enhance or accelerate them. As a consequence of negative changes in the oral cavity over time, treatment planning for RPDs becomes highly complex. A set of reliable criteria is necessary for decision-making and problem management It appears that the majority of published data on RPDs does not depict high effectiveness of this treatment modality. From a strict point of view of evidence-based dentistry, the level of evidence is low if not missing for RPDs. Randomized controlled trials on RPDs are difficult to design, they are not feasible for some questions due to the complexity of the material, or may remain without clinical relevance. The literature rarely gives information on the denture design, tooth selection, and management of the compromised structural integrity of teeth. So far treatment outcomes with RPDs must be considered under the aspect of bias due to the bias in indication and patient selection for RPDs. Better clinical models should be elaborated with more stringent concepts for providing RPDs. This encompasses: risk analysis and patient assessment, proper indications for maintenance or extraction of teeth, strategic placement of implants, biomechanical aspects, materials, and technology. Although there is a tendency to offer fixed prostheses to our patients, this might change again with demographic changes and with an increase in the ageing population, an increase in their reduced dentition, and low socioeconomic wealth in large parts of the world.

[Titanium-alloy vs. CoCr-alloy in removable prosthodontics--a clinical study]

Different types of titanium-alloys instead of CoCr-alloys have been tested as material for the framework of removable partial dentures (RPD). Adequate casting and processing techniques have been developed which enable to fabricate frameworks of complex designs and the problem limits porosity. This opened new possibilities for the use of titanium-alloys with improved properties (E-module). The aim of this study was to summarise the use of titanium in removable prosthodontics and to evaluate prospectively the use of the Ti6A17Nb-alloy for RPDs in a small group of patients. Two identically designed RPDs from CoCr-alloy (remanium GM 800+) and Ti6A17Nb-alloy (girotan L) were produced for ten patients. They had to wear each RPD during six months, first the CoCr-RPD and then the Ti6A17Nb-RPD. A questionnaire (visual analogue scale = VAS) was completed by the patients after one, three and six months of function for each RPD. Prosthetic complications and service needed were recorded. After the end of the entire observation period of twelve months, the patients remained with the Ti6A17Nb-RPD and answered the questionnaire after another six months. All parameters regarding the design of the RPDs were positively estimated by the dentist. Minimal, not significant differences were noted by the patients concerning comfort, stability and retention (VAS). Clinically, no differences in technical aspects or regarding biological complications were observed after six-months periods. The Ti6A17Nb-alloy (girotan L) for the framework of RPDs was judged by patients and professionals to be equivalent to RPDs made from CoCr-alloy. No differences in material aspects could objectively be observed. The Ti6A17Nb-alloy can be beneficial for patients with allergies or incompatibility with one or several components of the CoCr-alloy.

Are endodontically treated incisors reliable abutments for zirconia-based fixed partial dentures in the esthetic zone?

This ex vivo pilot study tested the influence of defect extension and quartz-fiber post placement (QFP) on the ex vivo survival rate and fracture resistance of root-treated upper central incisors served as abutments for zirconia 2-unit cantilever fixed partial dentures (2U-FPDs) exposed to 10 years of simulated clinical function.

Clinical retention force development of double crowns

This study deals with the development of the retentive forces of double crowns intraorally measured. Twenty-five combined fixed-removable prostheses with a total of 84 double crowns were included in the study. The intraoral measurement was performed at 72 defined measuring points directly adjacent to the double crowns of the dentures. The measurement was performed 4-6 weeks (baseline), 6 months (recall 1), and 18 months (recall 2) after the insertion of the restoration. A specifically designed measuring device was used. The median values for the single measuring points reached 4.705 N at the baseline, 5.190 N after 6 months, and 3.740 N after 18 months. The measured values were analyzed according to differences between the median retention forces at the three defined points in time. The statistical analysis of the median values showed no statistical difference for the retention force change after 6 months but for the decrease until the second recall (Mann-Whitney test). The retention force per denture was calculated by a summation of the single measuring points. At the baseline, 12.9 N was reached. The forces did only decrease slightly and were not statistically significant. The results indicate that retention force values of double crowns, measured intraorally at the patient, do not relevantly change clinically within the first 1.5 years. Within the limitations of this study, it can be stated that wear does not influence the retentive forces of double crowns within the first 18 months. After this period the retention force should be still sufficient for denture retention.

A Systematic Review of the Clinical Performance of Tooth-Retained and Implant-Retained Double Crown Prostheses with a Follow-Up of ≥3 Years

Purpose: The objective of this review was to systematically screen the literature for data related to the survival and complication rates observed with dental or implant double crown abutments and removable prostheses under functional loading for at least 3 years. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of the dental literature from January 1966 to December 2009 was performed in electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) as well as by an extensive hand search to investigate the clinical outcomes of double crown reconstructions. Results: From the total of 2412 titles retrieved from the search, 65 were selected for full-text review. Subsequently, 17 papers were included for data extraction. An estimation of the cumulative survival and complication rates was not feasible due to the lack of detailed information. Tooth survival rates for telescopic abutment teeth ranged from 82.5% to 96.5% after an observation period of 3.4 to 6 years, and for tooth-supported double crown retained dentures from 66.7% to 98.6% after an observation period of 6 to 10 years. The survival rates of implants were between 97.9% and 100% and for telescopic-retained removable dental prostheses with two mandibular implants, 100% after 3.0 and 10.4 years. The major biological complications affecting the tooth abutments were gingival inflammation, periodontal disease, and caries. The most frequent technical complications were loss of cementation and loss of facings. Conclusions: The main findings of this review are: (I) double crown tooth abutments and dentures demonstrated a wide range of survival rates. (II) Implant-supported mandibular overdentures demonstrated a favorable long-term prognosis. (III) A greater need for prosthetic maintenance is required for both tooth-supported and implant-supported reconstructions. (IV) Future areas of research would involve designing appropriate longitudinal studies for comparisons of survival and complication rates of different reconstruction designs.

What is the optimal number of implants for removable reconstructions? A systematic review on implant-supported overdentures

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the optimal number of implants for removable reconstructions.

Immediate loading of implants with 3-unit fixed partial dentures: a 12-month clinical study

PURPOSE: The aim of the present clinical trial was to evaluate the 12-month success rate of titanium dental implants placed in the posterior mandible and immediately loaded with 3-unit fixed partial dentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with missing mandibular premolars and molars were enrolled in this study. To be included in the study, the implants had to show good primary stability. Implant stability was measured with resonance frequency analysis using the Osstell device (Integration Diagnostics). Implants were included in the study when the stability quotient (ISQ) exceeded 62. Clinical measurements, such as width of keratinized tissue, ISQ, and radiographic assessment of peri-implant bone crest levels, were performed at baseline and at the 12-month follow-up. The comparison between the baseline and the 12-month visits was performed with the Student t test for paired data (statistically significant at a level of alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: Forty implants with a sandblasted, large grit, acid-etched (SLA) surface (Straumann) were placed in 20 patients. At 12 months, only 1 implant had been lost because of an acute infection. The remaining 39 implants were successful, resulting in a 1-year success rate of 97.5%. Neither peri-implant bone levels, measured radiographically, nor implant stability changed significantly from baseline to the 12-month follow-up (P > .05). DISCUSSION: The immediate functional loading of implants placed in this case series study resulted in a satisfactory success rate. CONCLUSION: The findings from this clinical study showed that the placement of SLA transmucosal implants in the mandibular area and their immediate loading with 3-unit fixed partial dentures may be a safe and successful procedure.

Implant-supported distal extensions in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges

The application of implant-borne rehabilitations in residual alveolar ridges may be restricted by various anatomic conditions, as available bone height and characteristics. Here we report the clinical outcome of implants placed in severely resorbed posterior ridges, in addition to various implant-supported treatment modalities. Extra Oral implants (Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) with the intraosseous length of 2.5–5mm were installed in the posterior alveolar ridges. Following the healing period of 4–6 months, implants were exposed and included in the distal extensions of fixed and removable prosthesis. At recall appointments were collected surgical, clinical and radiological variables, including the evidence of adverse effects. An 8-years life table analysis was calculated. The treatment protocol was applied in thirty-five patients, presenting 31 removable and 4 fixed complete implant-supported dentures. A total of 61 Extra Oral implants were placed posterior to the distal implants, at the mean distance of 29.8mm (range 15.6–62.7mm). Three implants failed during the osteointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 92.24%. Following the osteointegration period, no major bone loss or other adverse events were found. The clinical results indicated that the Extra Oral implants may be successfully used in addition to the other, longer implants. Thus, a relatively long extension in the posterior region may be employed. With careful preoperative planning, this technique offers a simple and beneficial complementary treatment option for removable and fixed complete dentures.