An in vitro comparative study to evaluate the retention of different attachment systems used in implant-retained overdentures

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the change in the retentive force and removal torque of three attachment systems during simulation of insertion-removal cycles. Methodology: Edentulous mandibular models were made with heat-cured polymethyl methacrylate resin. Two implant replicas (CMI), of 3.75 mm diameter and 10 mm length, were placed in the intraforaminal region. Acrylic resin mandibular overdentures were fabricated and provision was made to receive three different overdenture attachment systems, prefabricated ball/o-ring attachment (Lifecare Biosystems, Thane, India), Hader bar and clip attachment (Sterngold, Attleboro, MA), and Locator ® implant overdenture attachment stud type (Zest Anchors LLC, USA). Using a universal testing machine, each of the models were subjected to 100 pulls each to dislodge the overdenture from the acrylic model, and the force values as indicated on the digital indicator were tabulated both before and after thermocycling (AT). Statistical Analysis Used: Statistical analysis comprised Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Friedman test, and Wilcoxon signed ranks test. Results: The statistical model revealed a significantly different behavior of the attachment systems both before and AT. The ball/o-ring and bar attachments developed higher retentive force as compared to the locator attachment. The bar and clip attachment exhibited the highest peak as well as the highest mean retention force at the end of the study. The Locator ® attachment showed a decrease in retentive potential after an early peak. Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The ball/o-ring and bar and clip attachments exhibit higher retentive capacities than the Locator ® attachment over time.

[1]  Jing Li,et al.  Comparison of the flexural strength and marginal accuracy of traditional and CAD/CAM interim materials before and after thermal cycling. , 2014, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[2]  Frauke Müller,et al.  Effects of in vitro cyclic dislodging on retentive force and removal torque of three overdenture attachment systems. , 2014, Clinical oral implants research.

[3]  F. Müller,et al.  Masseter muscle thickness, chewing efficiency and bite force in edentulous patients with fixed and removable implant-supported prostheses: a cross-sectional multicenter study. , 2012, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  Yoshinobu Maeda,et al.  Attachment systems for implant overdenture: influence of implant inclination on retentive and lateral forces. , 2011, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  M. Yaltırık,et al.  Complications associated with the ball, bar and Locator attachments for implant-supported overdentures. , 2011, Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal.

[6]  L. Keilig,et al.  Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments. , 2011, Gerodontology.

[7]  V. Rutkunas,et al.  Wear simulation effects on overdenture stud attachments. , 2011, Dental materials journal.

[8]  Frauke Müller,et al.  Edentulism as part of the general health problems of elderly adults. , 2010, International dental journal.

[9]  G E Carlsson,et al.  The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. , 2010, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[10]  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.

[11]  P. Pröschel,et al.  Improvement and long-term stability of neuromuscular adaptation in implant-supported overdentures. , 2009, Clinical oral implants research.

[12]  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.

[13]  B. Scott,et al.  Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients - the York Consensus Statement , 2009, BDJ.

[14]  R. Masri,et al.  The change in retentive values of locator attachments and hader clips over time. , 2009, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[15]  Carlo P Marinello,et al.  [Locator or ball attachment: a guide for clinical decision making]. , 2009, Schweizer Monatsschrift fur Zahnmedizin = Revue mensuelle suisse d'odonto-stomatologie = Rivista mensile svizzera di odontologia e stomatologia.

[16]  M. Yaltırık,et al.  A Clinical Comparison of Prosthetic Complications of Implant-Supported Overdentures With Different Attachment Systems , 2008, Implant dentistry.

[17]  G. Carlsson,et al.  What are the prevalence and incidence of tooth loss in the adult and elderly population in Europe? , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

[18]  H. Hirayama,et al.  Attachment Systems for Implant Retained Overdentures: A Literature Review , 2006, Implant dentistry.

[19]  A. van der Bilt,et al.  Patient satisfaction and preference with magnet, bar-clip, and ball-socket retained mandibular implant overdentures: a cross-over clinical trial. , 2005, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[20]  Hiroshi Mizutani,et al.  Evaluation of stable retentive properties of overdenture attachments. , 2005, Stomatologija.

[21]  K. Chung,et al.  Retention characteristics of attachment systems for implant overdentures. , 2004, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[22]  M. Jeffcoat,et al.  The implant-supported overdenture as an alternative to the complete mandibular denture. , 2003, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[23]  J. P. Lund,et al.  Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: a randomized clinical trial in a senior population. , 2003, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[24]  M. Heath,et al.  Maximum bite force after the replacement of complete dentures. , 2002, Gerodontology.

[25]  S. Sadowsky Mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a literature review. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[26]  D. Walshaw,et al.  A patient-based assessment of implant-stabilized and conventional complete dentures. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[27]  T D Taylor,et al.  Management of the edentulous patient. , 2000, Clinical oral implants research.

[28]  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.

[29]  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.

[30]  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.