Standardizing the evaluation criteria on treatment outcomes of mandibular implant overdentures: a systematic review

PURPOSE The aim of this review was to analyze the evaluation criteria on mandibular implant overdentures through a systematic review and suggest standardized evaluation criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted by PubMed search strategy and hand-searching of relevant journals from included studies considering inclusion and exclusion criteria. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) and clinical trial studies comparing attachment systems on mandibular implant overdentures until December, 2011 were selected. Twenty nine studies were finally selected and the data about evaluation methods were collected. RESULTS Evaluation criteria could be classified into 4 groups (implant survival, peri-implant tissue evaluation, prosthetic evaluation, and patient satisfaction). Among 29 studies, 21 studies presented implant survival rate, while any studies reporting implant failure did not present cumulative implant survival rate. Seventeen studies evaluating peri-implant tissue status presented following items as evaluation criteria; marginal bone level (14), plaque Index (13), probing depth (8), bleeding index (8), attachment gingiva level (8), gingival index (6), amount of keratinized gingiva (1). Eighteen studies evaluating prosthetic maintenance and complication also presented following items as evaluation criteria; loose matrix (17), female detachment (15), denture fracture (15), denture relining (14), abutment fracture (14), abutment screw loosening (11), and occlusal adjustment (9). Atypical questionnaire (9), Visual analog scales (VAS) (4), and Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) (1) were used as the format of criteria to evaluate patients satisfaction in 14 studies. CONCLUSION For evaluation of implant overdenture, it is necessary to include cumulative survival rate for implant evaluation. It is suggested that peri-implant tissue evaluation criteria include marginal bone level, plaque index, bleeding index, probing depth, and attached gingiva level. It is also suggested that prosthetic evaluation criteria include loose matrix, female detachment, denture fracture, denture relining, abutment fracture, abutment screw loosening, and occlusal adjustment. Finally standardized criteria like OHIP-EDENT or VAS are required for patient satisfaction.

[1]  Sang‐Wan Shin,et al.  Attachment systems for mandibular implant overdentures: a systematic review , 2012, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[2]  T. A. Trovik,et al.  Randomized clinical trial comparing dietary intake in patients with implant-retained overdentures and conventionally relined denture. , 2012, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[3]  N. Mittmann,et al.  Utility Scores for Chronic Conditions in a Community-Dwelling Population , 1999, PharmacoEconomics.

[4]  W. Thomson,et al.  Mandibular two-implant overdentures: prosthodontic maintenance using different loading protocols and attachment systems. , 2011, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[5]  C. Thomson,et al.  Recruitment of lactating women into a randomized dietary intervention: successful strategies and factors promoting enrollment and retention. , 2011, Contemporary clinical trials.

[6]  W. Thomson,et al.  Mandibular two-implant overdentures: three-year prosthodontic maintenance using the locator attachment system. , 2011, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[7]  D. R. Burns,et al.  Randomized, prospective, clinical evaluation of prosthodontic modalities for mandibular implant overdenture treatment. , 2011, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  P. Hunter.  Limited evidence for evaluating differences in marginal bone loss between conventional, early and immediate loading protocols for mandibular two-implant overdentures. , 2011, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[9]  A. van der Bilt,et al.  Mandibular overdentures retained by two implants: 10-year results from a crossover clinical trial comparing ball-socket and bar-clip attachments. , 2010, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[10]  Sunyoung Ma,et al.  Marginal bone loss with mandibular two-implant overdentures using different loading protocols: a systematic literature review. , 2010, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[11]  E. Roumanas.  The frequency of replacement of dental restorations may vary based on a number of variables, including type of material, size of the restoration, and caries risk of the patient. , 2010, The journal of evidence-based dental practice.

[12]  B. Al-Nawas,et al.  A comparison of three different attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: one-year report. , 2009, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[13]  Michael L. Newman,et al.  Journal Editorial Policies, Animal Welfare, and the 3Rs , 2009, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[14]  Ahmed S Assad,et al.  Comparison of Prefabricated and Custom-Made Bars Used for Implant-Retained Mandibular Complete Overdentures , 2009, Implant dentistry.

[15]  D. Halpin,et al.  Living with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: patients concerns regarding death and dying , 2009, Palliative medicine.

[16]  M. Swain,et al.  Attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: a review of in vitro investigations on retention and wear features. , 2009, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[17]  E. O'Shea,et al.  Improving Palliative and End-Of-Life Care for Older People in Ireland: A New Model and Framework for Institutional Care , 2009, Journal of palliative care.

[18]  J. Walton,et al.  A randomized clinical trial comparing patient satisfaction and prosthetic outcomes with mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. , 2009, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[19]  D. Wismeijer,et al.  An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Aftercare and Cost-analysis with Three Types of Mandibular Implant-retained Overdentures , 2007, Journal of dental research.

[20]  D. Wismeijer,et al.  An eight-year follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of aftercare and cost-analysis with three types of mandibular implant-retained overdentures. , 2007, Journal of dental research.

[21]  G. Heydecke,et al.  Influence of implant and conventional prostheses on satisfaction and quality of life: A literature review. Part 2: Qualitative analysis and evaluation of the studies. , 2006, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[22]  J. Walton,et al.  A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three-year results. , 2005 .

[23]  A. Haffajee,et al.  Implant dentistry; prosthodontics: Microbiological and clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction for two treatment options in the edentulous lower jaw after 10 years of function , 2005, British Dental Journal.

[24]  M. Quirynen,et al.  A 10-year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining mandibular overdentures: peri-implant outcome. , 2005, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[25]  M. Quirynen,et al.  Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a 10-year randomized clinical study. , 2005, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[26]  Ahmed S Assad,et al.  Comparison Between Mainly Mucosa-Supported and Combined Mucosa–Implant-Supported Mandibular Overdentures , 2004, Implant dentistry.

[27]  R. Timmerman,et al.  An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Participant Satisfaction with Three Types of Mandibular Implant-retained Overdentures , 2004, Journal of dental research.

[28]  E. Roumanas,et al.  Comparisons of chewing difficulty of consumed foods with mandibular conventional dentures and implant-supported overdentures in diabetic denture wearers. , 2003, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[29]  J. Walton.  A randomized clinical trial comparing two mandibular implant overdenture designs: 3-year prosthetic outcomes using a six-field protocol. , 2003, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[30]  J. Walton,et al.  One-year prosthetic outcomes with implant overdentures: a randomized clinical trial. , 2002, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[31]  R. M. Diener,et al.  A randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-supported overdentures and conventional dentures in diabetic patients. Part V: food preference comparisons. , 2002, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[32]  N. von Wowern,et al.  Implant-supported overdentures, a prevention of bone loss in edentulous mandibles? A 5-year follow-up study. , 2001, Clinical oral implants research.

[33]  J. Walton,et al.  The outcome of implant overdentures from a prosthodontic perspective: proposal for a classification protocol. , 2001, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[34]  E. Roumanas,et al.  A randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-supported overdentures and conventional dentures in diabetic patients. Part IV: Comparisons of dietary intake. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[35]  D M Davis,et al.  The maintenance requirements of mandibular overdentures stabilized by Astra Tech implants using three different attachment mechanisms--balls, magnets, and bars; 3-year results. , 2000, The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry.

[36]  Y. Solomons,et al.  Mandibular implant-supported overdentures: a prospective evaluation of the burden of prosthodontic maintenance with 3 different attachment systems. , 2000, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[37]  K. Gotfredsen,et al.  Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with ball or bar attachments: a randomized prospective 5-year study. , 2000, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[38]  Davis Dm,et al.  Mandibular overdentures stabilized by Astra Tech implants with either ball attachments or magnets: 5-year results. , 1999 .

[39]  D. Steenberghe,et al.  A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction. , 1999, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[40]  D. Davis,et al.  Mandibular overdentures stabilized by Astra Tech implants with either ball attachments or magnets: 5-year results. , 1999, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[41]  R. M. Diener,et al.  A randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-supported overdentures and conventional dentures in diabetic patients. Part II. Comparisons of masticatory performance. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[42]  D. van Steenberghe,et al.  A 5-year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: Peri-implant outcome. , 1998, Clinical oral implants research.

[43]  D. Wismeijer,et al.  Patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures. A comparison of three treatment strategies with ITI-dental implants. , 1997, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery.

[44]  D. Davis.  Implant supported overdentures--the King's experience. , 1997, Journal of dentistry.

[45]  D. van Steenberghe,et al.  A randomised clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in mandibular overdenture therapy. A 3-year report. , 1997, Clinical oral investigations.

[46]  K. Gotfredsen.  Implant supported overdentures--the Copenhagen experience. , 1997, Journal of dentistry.

[47]  Davis Dm,et al.  The extent of maintenance required by implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a 3-year report. , 1996 .

[48]  J. O. Rogers,et al.  The extent of maintenance required by implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a 3-year report. , 1996, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[49]  M. Quirynen,et al.  A comparative prospective study of splinted and unsplinted Brånemark implants in mandibular overdenture therapy: a preliminary report. , 1994, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[50]  A H Geering,et al.  Peri-implant mucosal aspects of ITI implants supporting overdentures. A five-year longitudinal study. , 1994, Clinical oral implants research.