Attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures: a review of in vitro investigations on retention and wear features.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to review the published literature on in vitro articles investigating the retentive force or wear features of different attachment systems, specifically for mandibular two-implant overdentures using an unsplinted prosthodontic design. MATERIALS AND METHODS An electronic search was performed through PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases using Boolean operators to combine the following key words: "retention," "wear," "overdenture attachments," "attachment systems," "implant-retained overdentures," and "implant-supported overdentures." The search was limited to articles written in English published up to October 2008. In addition, a hand search through articles and reference lists retrieved from the electronic search and peer-reviewed journals was also conducted. RESULTS From a total of 193 articles, only 15 met the specified inclusion criteria for the review. These articles provided evidence that the majority of attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures demonstrate a reduction in their retentive force under in vitro conditions. Wear was unquestionably implicated as the etiologic factor for the loss of retention; however, the specific mechanisms involved in the wear process have not been researched adequately. Findings from the literature have also implicated several factors that influence the retentive force of the attachment system and its wear features; compelling evidence on its precise role however, is still lacking. CONCLUSIONS Further in vitro investigations of the factors involved in the retention and wear of attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures are still needed. These factors must be investigated separately under well-controlled conditions to limit the influence of confounding variables on their outcome.

[1]  G. Michelinakis,et al.  The influence of interimplant distance and attachment type on the retention characteristics of mandibular overdentures on 2 implants: 6-month fatigue retention values. , 2008, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[2]  V. Rutkunas,et al.  Influence of attachment wear on retention of mandibular overdenture. , 2007, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[3]  T. Taylor,et al.  Effect of implant angulation upon retention of overdenture attachments. , 2005 .

[4]  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.

[5]  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 .

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

[7]  L. Vaz,et al.  Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems. , 2004, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[8]  C. Besimo,et al.  In vitro retention force changes of prefabricated attachments for overdentures. , 2003, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[9]  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.

[10]  Ignace Naert,et al.  The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. , 2003, Quintessence international.

[11]  V. Petropoulos,et al.  Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments. , 2002, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[12]  A. van der Bilt,et al.  The influence of various attachment types in mandibular implant-retained overdentures on maximum bite force and EMG. , 2002, Journal of dental research.

[13]  I. R. Harris,et al.  Magnets in prosthetic dentistry. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry (Print).

[14]  M. Wichmann,et al.  Wear behavior of precision attachments. , 1999, The International journal of prosthodontics.

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

[16]  S. H. Lee,et al.  Retention of prefabricated attachments for implant stabilized overdentures in the edentulous mandible: an in vitro study. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[17]  M. Quirynen,et al.  The reliability of implant-retained hinging overdentures for the fully edentulous mandible An up to 9-year longitudinal study , 1997, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[18]  J. Brudvik,et al.  Retention of ERA direct overdenture attachments before and after fatigue loading. , 1997, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[19]  V. Petropoulos,et al.  Comparison of retention and release periods for implant overdenture attachments. , 1997, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[20]  C. Besimo,et al.  Retention force changes in implant-supported titanium telescope crowns over long-term use in vitro. , 1996, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[21]  H. Preiskel.  Overdentures Made Easy: A Guide to Implant and Root Supported Prostheses , 1996 .

[22]  D. R. Burns,et al.  Prospective clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures: Part II--Patient satisfaction and preference. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[23]  Watkinson Ac.  The replacement of attachment-retained prostheses. , 1987 .

[24]  G Becerra,et al.  A classification of precision attachments. , 1987, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[25]  B L Stewart,et al.  Retention and wear of precision-type attachments. , 1983, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[26]  E. Dolder.  The bar joint mandibular denture , 1961 .