Comparison of the retentive characteristics of two additional attachment used with an implant bar attachment

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retentive characteristics of the additional attachments used with implant bar attachment under repeated insertion/removal cycles. Materials and methods: The newly developed attachment and the commercially available attachment were investigated: ADD-Lock (AL), Locator blue (LB). Two fixtures were placed parallel to each other on the custom lower mounting, and patrix of each attachment was fixed to the fixture. Also, the matrix of each attachment was placed on the opposing upper mounting. A universal testing machine was used to measure the retentive force during initial, 100, 250, 500, 1000, 2000, and 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles. Wear and deformation of the attachment s were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05) and wilcoxon signed-rank test (α=.05) were performed to compare retentive force between each group and before and after 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles. Results: In terms of initial retentive force and retentive force after 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles, the AL group (15.24 ± 1.46 N and 9.74 ± 1.16 N) showed significantly smaller values than the LB group (43.53 ± 12.39 N and 22.99 ± 4.77 N) (P<.05). Also, in the loss of retentive force, the AL group (5.50 ± 1.08 N, 36.08%) showed a smaller value than the LB group (20.54 ± 11.89 N, 47.19%) (P<.05). Based on SEM analysis, The AL group showed noticeable wear and deformation in the patrix and the LB group in the matrix. Conclusion: Locator showed a higher initial retentive force than newly developed attachment, while the loss of retentive force was also higher. Both additional attachments are considered to have sufficient retentive force after repeated insertion/removal cycles. (J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2021;59:173-80)

[1]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses with New Retention Type Using Zirconia Ball and Nickel-Titanium Spring , 2019, The Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantology.

[2]  M. A. Elsyad,et al.  Locator Versus Bar Attachment Effect on the Retention and Stability of Implant‐Retained Maxillary Overdenture: An In Vitro Study , 2019, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[3]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis with a microlocking implant prosthetic system: A clinical report. , 2019, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[4]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Load-Bearing Capacity and Retention of Newly Developed Micro-Locking Implant Prosthetic System: An In Vitro Pilot Study , 2018, Materials.

[5]  E. Tokar,et al.  Evaluation of the retention characteristics of various stud attachment systems for implant retained overdenture. , 2018, Acta of bioengineering and biomechanics.

[6]  H. Petridis,et al.  The Effect of Different Water Temperatures on Retention Loss and Material Degradation of Locator Attachments , 2017, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[7]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Retention and wear behaviors of two implant overdenture stud‐type attachments at different implant angulations , 2017, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Influence of implant angulation and cyclic dislodging on the retentive force of two different overdenture attachments - an in vitro study. , 2016, Clinical oral implants research.

[9]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Comparison of changes in retentive force of three stud attachments for implant overdentures , 2015, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[10]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Implant overdenture using a locator bar system by drill and tapping technique in a mandible edentulous patient: a case report , 2012, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[11]  Sang-Chun Oh,et al.  Implant Supported Overdenture using Milled Titanium Bar with $Locator^{(R)}$ Attachment on Fully Edentulous Maxillae : A Case Report , 2011 .

[12]  M. Mesquita,et al.  The service life of implant-retained overdenture attachment systems. , 2009, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[13]  G. Heydecke,et al.  How do patients perceive the benefit of reconstructive dentistry with regard to oral health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction? A systematic review. , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  Helen Bhattacharyya Kruskal–Wallis Test , 2006 .

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

[16]  G. Michelinakis,et al.  The influence of interimplant distance and attachment type on the retention characteristics of mandibular overdentures on 2 implants: initial retention values. , 2006, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[17]  임장섭,et al.  COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF RETENTIVE FORCES IN MAXILLARY OVERDENTURE BAR ATTACHMENTS , 2005 .

[18]  A. van der Bilt,et al.  Retention and postinsertion maintenance of bar-clip, ball and magnet attachments in mandibular implant overdenture treatment: an in vivo comparison after 3 months of function. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[19]  M. Bakke,et al.  Masticatory function and patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a prospective 5-year study. , 2002, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[20]  G. Kurtzman,et al.  Restoration of divergent free-standing implants in the maxilla. , 2002, The Journal of oral implantology.

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

[22]  A A Caputo,et al.  Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[23]  C. Watson,et al.  Implant complications and failures: the complete overdenture. , 2001, Dental update.

[24]  C P Marinello,et al.  Treatment plan for restoring the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported restorations: removable overdenture versus fixed partial denture design. , 1999, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[25]  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.

[26]  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.

[27]  D. R. Burns,et al.  Prospective clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures: Part I--Retention, stability, and tissue response. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[28]  M. van Waas,et al.  The influence of clinical variables on patients' satisfaction with complete dentures. , 1990, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.