Abstract
Poor stability of a complete denture is a common problem due to bone atrophy of the edentulous ridge. The aim of the present study was to analyze denture stability after receiving implants and to study the biomechanical properties of denture implants and the bone bed using conventional or mini implants. Five models based on computed tomography (CT) data of edentulous patients were created. The overdentures’ connection to the implants was assured by means of ball head abutments and rubber rings. In three models, the denture was supported by two to four conventional implants and in two models, the overdenture was supported by three to five mini implants. The dentures were loaded according to the individual biting forces which was clinically measured by means of pressure sheets. After implantation, the biting forces and displacements of overdentures increased in comparison to complete dentures. Displacements and stresses were higher with mini implants than with conventional ones. Stress in the implants was markedly below the yield stress of titanium grade 5 (880 MPa). An increase in the stress in the bone around the implants was noticed as compared to the situation with complete dentures which was below the physiological range of bone loading (<4 MPa).
References
[1] Aunmeungtong W, Khongkhunthian P, Rungsiyakull P. Stress and strain distribution in three different mini dental implant designs using in implant retained overdenture: a finite element analysis study. Oral Implantol 2016; 9: 202–212.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Cardoso RG, Melo LA, Barbosa GA, et al. Impact of mandibular conventional denture and overdenture on quality of life and masticatory efficiency. Braz Oral Res 2016; 30: e102.10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2016.vol30.0102Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[3] Dimililer G, Kücükkurt S, Cetiner S. Biomechanical effects of implant number and diameter on stress distributions in maxillary implant-supported overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 2017. [Epub ahead of print].10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.03.016Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[4] Flanagan D. Bite force and dental implant treatment: a short review. Med Devices 2017; 10: 141–148.10.2147/MDER.S130314Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[5] Fontijn-Tekamp FA, Slagter AP, Van Der Bilt A, et al. Biting and chewing in overdentures, full dentures, and natural dentitions. J Dent Res 2000; 79: 1519–1524.10.1177/00220345000790071501Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] Fontijn-Tekamp FA, Slagter AP, van’t Hof MA, Kalk W, Jansen JA. Pain and instability during biting with mandibular implant-retained overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 46–51.10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012001046.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[7] Garhnayak M, Garhnayak L, Dev S, Kar AK, Mohapatra A. Prosthodontic management of flat mandibular ridge by mini implant supported over denture. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8: 19–21.10.7860/JCDR/2014/8843.4593Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[8] Griffitts TM, Collins CP, Collins PC. Mini dental implants: an adjunct for retention, stability, and comfort for the edentulous patient. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005; 100: e81–e84.10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.06.018Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[9] Hasan I, Madarlis C, Keilig L, et al. Changes in biting forces with implant-supported overdenture in the lower jaw: a comparison between conventional and mini implants in a pilot study. Ann Anat 2016; 208: 116–122.10.1016/j.aanat.2016.06.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[10] Kutkut A, Bertoli E, Frazer R, Pinto-Sinai G, Fuentealba Hidalgo R, Studts J. A systematic review of studies comparing conventional complete denture and implant retained overdenture. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62: 1–9.10.1016/j.jpor.2017.06.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[11] Lambade D, Lambade P, Gundawar S. Implant supported mandibular overdenture. A viable treatment option for edentulous mandible. J Clin Diagn Research 2014; 8: ZD04–ZD06.10.7860/JCDR/2014/7711.4332Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[12] Müller F, Duvernay E, Loup A, Vazquez L, Herrmann FR, Schimmel M. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures in very old adults: a randomized controlled trial. J Dent Res 2013; 92: 154S–160S.10.1177/0022034513509630Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[13] Solberg K, Heinemann F, Pellikaan P, et al. Finite element analysis of different loading conditions for implant-supported overdentures supported by conventional or mini implants. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2017; 20: 770–782.10.1080/10255842.2017.1302432Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[14] Takayama Y, Sasaki H, Goto M, Mizuno K, Saito M, Yokoyama A. Morphological factors of mandibular edentulous alveolar ridges influencing the movement of dentures calculated using finite element analysis. J Prosthodont Res 2011; 55: 98–103.10.1016/j.jpor.2010.09.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[15] van Kampen FM, van der Bilt A, Cune MS, Fontijn-Tekamp FA, Bosman F. Masticatory function with implant-supported overdentures. J Dent Res 2004; 83: 708–711.10.1177/154405910408300910Search in Google Scholar PubMed
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
