The Experts below are selected from a list of 11454 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Arjan Vissink - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
four or six implants in the maxillary posterior region to support an overdenture 5 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2019Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Marco S. Cune, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes when providing maxillary Overdentures on four bar- and six bar-connected implants placed in the posterior region during a 5-year follow-up period. Materials and methods Sixty-six fully edentulous patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and insufficient bone volume to allow implant placement were scheduled for a maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure with bone from the anterior iliac crest and randomized to receive either four or six implants in the posterior maxilla and four implants in the mandible. After 3 months of osseointegration, a bar-supported overdenture was constructed. Maxillary implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, peri-implant bone height changes and patient satisfaction were assessed. Results Sixty patients completed the 5-year follow-up. Implant survival was 100% in the four-implant group and 99.5% in the six-implant group. No new Overdentures had to be made in the four-implant group, and three new Overdentures were made in the six-implant group due to excessive wear of the denture base and teeth (90.9% overdenture survival). Clinical parameters did not differ significantly between groups. Mean marginal bone loss compared to baseline was 0.58 +/- 0.51 mm in the four-implant group and 0.60 +/- 0.58 mm in the six-implant group, respectively. Overall, patient satisfaction improved significantly, but did not differ between groups. Conclusion Following a bilateral maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure, a bar-supported overdenture on four implants in the posterior maxillary region is not inferior to an overdenture supported by six implants after a 5-year evaluation period in patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and marked posterior resorption (Clinical trial registration number: NTR2969).
-
a systematic review of implant supported Overdentures in the edentulous maxilla compared to the mandible how many implants
European Journal of Oral Implantology, 2014Co-Authors: Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A Meijer, Jan Slot, James Huddleston J R Slater, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Background and aim: There is now overwhelming evidence from systematic reviews that a two-implant overdenture is the first choice of treatment for the edentulous mandible. Conversely, consensus is lacking for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the treatment outcome of concepts used for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures, focusing on the survival of implants, survival of maxillary Overdentures and condition of the implant surrounding hard and soft tissues after a mean observation period of at least 1 year. Material and methods: MEDLINE (1950 to December 2013), EMBASE (1966 to December 2013) and CENTRAL (1800 to December 2013) were searched to identify eligible studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles using specific study design-related quality assessment forms. Results: Out of 195 primarily selected articles, 24 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis showed an implant survival rate of 98.1% and overdenture survival of 99.5% per year in the case of 6 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage. In the case of 4 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage, implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 97.0% and 96.9% per year, respectively. In the case of 4 implants and a non-splinted anchorage (ball, locator, telescopic crown), implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 88.9% and 98.8% per year, respectively. The condition of the pen-implant tissues was not reported in most studies. Conclusions: An implant-supported maxillary overdenture (all studies 4 implants) provided with a splinted anchorage is accompanied with a high implant and overdenture survival rate (both >95% per year), while there is an increased risk of implant loss when 4 implants with a non-splinted anchorage are used.
-
maxillary Overdentures supported by four or six implants in the anterior region 1 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2013Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective Comparing treatment outcome of four and six bar-connected implants in the anterior maxillary region to support an overdenture during a 1-year follow-up period. Material and methods Fifty edentulous patients with lack of retention and stability of the upper denture, but with sufficient bone volume to place implants in the anterior maxillary region, were selected. Randomization assigned patients to either four or six implants. Implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, radiographic bone height changes, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. Results Forty-nine patients (one drop out) completed the 1-year follow-up. After 1year, implant survival was 100% in the four implants group and 99.3% in the six implants group (one implant lost). Overdenture survival was 100% in both groups. Mean clinical scores were low and did not differ between groups (independent Student's t-test). Mean marginal bone resorption was 0.24 +/- 0.32mm in the four implants group and 0.25 +/- 0.29mm in the six implants group. Patients' satisfaction had improved in both groups (paired Student's t-test). Conclusion Bar-supported Overdentures on four implants in the anterior maxillary region are not inferior to Overdentures supported by six bar-connected implants. Implant survival was high, peri-implant conditions were healthy and patients' satisfaction had increased significantly in both groups.
-
mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants a 10 year clinical trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2009Co-Authors: Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Rhk Batenburg, Anita Visser, Arjan VissinkAbstract:The aim of this 10-year clinical trial was to evaluate the treatment outcome (condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues, patient satisfaction, surgical and prosthetic aftercare) of mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four implants. Sixty edentulous patients with a mandibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated. Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants (group A) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants (group B). Standardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1, 5 and 10 years of functional loading. Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period, as well as patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups. In addition, no differences in satisfaction and aftercare were observed between the groups. There is no difference in the clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 10-year evaluation period. Patients of both groups were evenly satisfied with their Overdentures and received the same amount of aftercare. For reasons of cost-effectiveness, a two-implant overdenture is advised for patients with a Cawood classes IV-VI resorption of the mandible and complaints concerning retention and stability of the lower denture. To cite this article:Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 722-728.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x.
-
implant retained mandibular Overdentures versus conventional dentures 10 years of care and aftercare
International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2006Co-Authors: Anita Visser, Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Purpose: This 10-year prospective, randomized, clinical trial investigated the treatment outcome of edentulous patients treated with mandibular Overdentures retained by 2 endosseous implants compared with conventional dentures in patients with or without vestibuloplasty. Materials and Methods: One hundred fifty-one edentulous patients (5 groups) with a symphyseal mandibular bone height between 8 and 25 mm participated. Sixty-two patients were treated with an overdenture retained by 2 implants (groups 1 and 3), 59 patients were treated with a conventional denture (groups 2 and 5), and 30 patients were treated with a conventional denture after preprosthetic vestibuloplasty (group 4). Patients who received conventional dentures but preferred implants later on could undergo implant surgery after 1 year of their initial treatment, but were analyzed in their original group. The prosthetic and surgical care and aftercare were scored during a 10-year evaluation period. Results: One hundred thirty-three patients completed the 10-year follow-up evaluations. Forty-four percent of patients treated with conventional dentures switched within 10 years to implant-retained Overdentures, versus 16% of the patients who were treated with conventional dentures after vestibuloplasty. On average, a greater time investment and more treatment sessions were needed in patients treated with implant-retained Overdentures compared to patients treated with conventional dentures. Conclusion: Patients treated with an implant-retained overdenture need more treatment interventions and treatment time than patients treated with conventional dentures.
Henny J A Meijer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
four or six implants in the maxillary posterior region to support an overdenture 5 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2019Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Marco S. Cune, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes when providing maxillary Overdentures on four bar- and six bar-connected implants placed in the posterior region during a 5-year follow-up period. Materials and methods Sixty-six fully edentulous patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and insufficient bone volume to allow implant placement were scheduled for a maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure with bone from the anterior iliac crest and randomized to receive either four or six implants in the posterior maxilla and four implants in the mandible. After 3 months of osseointegration, a bar-supported overdenture was constructed. Maxillary implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, peri-implant bone height changes and patient satisfaction were assessed. Results Sixty patients completed the 5-year follow-up. Implant survival was 100% in the four-implant group and 99.5% in the six-implant group. No new Overdentures had to be made in the four-implant group, and three new Overdentures were made in the six-implant group due to excessive wear of the denture base and teeth (90.9% overdenture survival). Clinical parameters did not differ significantly between groups. Mean marginal bone loss compared to baseline was 0.58 +/- 0.51 mm in the four-implant group and 0.60 +/- 0.58 mm in the six-implant group, respectively. Overall, patient satisfaction improved significantly, but did not differ between groups. Conclusion Following a bilateral maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure, a bar-supported overdenture on four implants in the posterior maxillary region is not inferior to an overdenture supported by six implants after a 5-year evaluation period in patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and marked posterior resorption (Clinical trial registration number: NTR2969).
-
a systematic review of implant supported Overdentures in the edentulous maxilla compared to the mandible how many implants
European Journal of Oral Implantology, 2014Co-Authors: Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A Meijer, Jan Slot, James Huddleston J R Slater, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Background and aim: There is now overwhelming evidence from systematic reviews that a two-implant overdenture is the first choice of treatment for the edentulous mandible. Conversely, consensus is lacking for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the treatment outcome of concepts used for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures, focusing on the survival of implants, survival of maxillary Overdentures and condition of the implant surrounding hard and soft tissues after a mean observation period of at least 1 year. Material and methods: MEDLINE (1950 to December 2013), EMBASE (1966 to December 2013) and CENTRAL (1800 to December 2013) were searched to identify eligible studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles using specific study design-related quality assessment forms. Results: Out of 195 primarily selected articles, 24 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis showed an implant survival rate of 98.1% and overdenture survival of 99.5% per year in the case of 6 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage. In the case of 4 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage, implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 97.0% and 96.9% per year, respectively. In the case of 4 implants and a non-splinted anchorage (ball, locator, telescopic crown), implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 88.9% and 98.8% per year, respectively. The condition of the pen-implant tissues was not reported in most studies. Conclusions: An implant-supported maxillary overdenture (all studies 4 implants) provided with a splinted anchorage is accompanied with a high implant and overdenture survival rate (both >95% per year), while there is an increased risk of implant loss when 4 implants with a non-splinted anchorage are used.
-
maxillary Overdentures supported by four or six implants in the anterior region 1 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2013Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective Comparing treatment outcome of four and six bar-connected implants in the anterior maxillary region to support an overdenture during a 1-year follow-up period. Material and methods Fifty edentulous patients with lack of retention and stability of the upper denture, but with sufficient bone volume to place implants in the anterior maxillary region, were selected. Randomization assigned patients to either four or six implants. Implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, radiographic bone height changes, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. Results Forty-nine patients (one drop out) completed the 1-year follow-up. After 1year, implant survival was 100% in the four implants group and 99.3% in the six implants group (one implant lost). Overdenture survival was 100% in both groups. Mean clinical scores were low and did not differ between groups (independent Student's t-test). Mean marginal bone resorption was 0.24 +/- 0.32mm in the four implants group and 0.25 +/- 0.29mm in the six implants group. Patients' satisfaction had improved in both groups (paired Student's t-test). Conclusion Bar-supported Overdentures on four implants in the anterior maxillary region are not inferior to Overdentures supported by six bar-connected implants. Implant survival was high, peri-implant conditions were healthy and patients' satisfaction had increased significantly in both groups.
-
mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants a 10 year clinical trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2009Co-Authors: Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Rhk Batenburg, Anita Visser, Arjan VissinkAbstract:The aim of this 10-year clinical trial was to evaluate the treatment outcome (condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues, patient satisfaction, surgical and prosthetic aftercare) of mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four implants. Sixty edentulous patients with a mandibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated. Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants (group A) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants (group B). Standardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1, 5 and 10 years of functional loading. Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period, as well as patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups. In addition, no differences in satisfaction and aftercare were observed between the groups. There is no difference in the clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 10-year evaluation period. Patients of both groups were evenly satisfied with their Overdentures and received the same amount of aftercare. For reasons of cost-effectiveness, a two-implant overdenture is advised for patients with a Cawood classes IV-VI resorption of the mandible and complaints concerning retention and stability of the lower denture. To cite this article:Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 722-728.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x.
-
implant retained mandibular Overdentures versus conventional dentures 10 years of care and aftercare
International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2006Co-Authors: Anita Visser, Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Purpose: This 10-year prospective, randomized, clinical trial investigated the treatment outcome of edentulous patients treated with mandibular Overdentures retained by 2 endosseous implants compared with conventional dentures in patients with or without vestibuloplasty. Materials and Methods: One hundred fifty-one edentulous patients (5 groups) with a symphyseal mandibular bone height between 8 and 25 mm participated. Sixty-two patients were treated with an overdenture retained by 2 implants (groups 1 and 3), 59 patients were treated with a conventional denture (groups 2 and 5), and 30 patients were treated with a conventional denture after preprosthetic vestibuloplasty (group 4). Patients who received conventional dentures but preferred implants later on could undergo implant surgery after 1 year of their initial treatment, but were analyzed in their original group. The prosthetic and surgical care and aftercare were scored during a 10-year evaluation period. Results: One hundred thirty-three patients completed the 10-year follow-up evaluations. Forty-four percent of patients treated with conventional dentures switched within 10 years to implant-retained Overdentures, versus 16% of the patients who were treated with conventional dentures after vestibuloplasty. On average, a greater time investment and more treatment sessions were needed in patients treated with implant-retained Overdentures compared to patients treated with conventional dentures. Conclusion: Patients treated with an implant-retained overdenture need more treatment interventions and treatment time than patients treated with conventional dentures.
Gerry M Raghoebar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
four or six implants in the maxillary posterior region to support an overdenture 5 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2019Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Marco S. Cune, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes when providing maxillary Overdentures on four bar- and six bar-connected implants placed in the posterior region during a 5-year follow-up period. Materials and methods Sixty-six fully edentulous patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and insufficient bone volume to allow implant placement were scheduled for a maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure with bone from the anterior iliac crest and randomized to receive either four or six implants in the posterior maxilla and four implants in the mandible. After 3 months of osseointegration, a bar-supported overdenture was constructed. Maxillary implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, peri-implant bone height changes and patient satisfaction were assessed. Results Sixty patients completed the 5-year follow-up. Implant survival was 100% in the four-implant group and 99.5% in the six-implant group. No new Overdentures had to be made in the four-implant group, and three new Overdentures were made in the six-implant group due to excessive wear of the denture base and teeth (90.9% overdenture survival). Clinical parameters did not differ significantly between groups. Mean marginal bone loss compared to baseline was 0.58 +/- 0.51 mm in the four-implant group and 0.60 +/- 0.58 mm in the six-implant group, respectively. Overall, patient satisfaction improved significantly, but did not differ between groups. Conclusion Following a bilateral maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure, a bar-supported overdenture on four implants in the posterior maxillary region is not inferior to an overdenture supported by six implants after a 5-year evaluation period in patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and marked posterior resorption (Clinical trial registration number: NTR2969).
-
a systematic review of implant supported Overdentures in the edentulous maxilla compared to the mandible how many implants
European Journal of Oral Implantology, 2014Co-Authors: Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A Meijer, Jan Slot, James Huddleston J R Slater, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Background and aim: There is now overwhelming evidence from systematic reviews that a two-implant overdenture is the first choice of treatment for the edentulous mandible. Conversely, consensus is lacking for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the treatment outcome of concepts used for implant-supported maxillary Overdentures, focusing on the survival of implants, survival of maxillary Overdentures and condition of the implant surrounding hard and soft tissues after a mean observation period of at least 1 year. Material and methods: MEDLINE (1950 to December 2013), EMBASE (1966 to December 2013) and CENTRAL (1800 to December 2013) were searched to identify eligible studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles using specific study design-related quality assessment forms. Results: Out of 195 primarily selected articles, 24 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis showed an implant survival rate of 98.1% and overdenture survival of 99.5% per year in the case of 6 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage. In the case of 4 implants and a splinted (bar) anchorage, implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 97.0% and 96.9% per year, respectively. In the case of 4 implants and a non-splinted anchorage (ball, locator, telescopic crown), implant survival rate and overdenture survival were 88.9% and 98.8% per year, respectively. The condition of the pen-implant tissues was not reported in most studies. Conclusions: An implant-supported maxillary overdenture (all studies 4 implants) provided with a splinted anchorage is accompanied with a high implant and overdenture survival rate (both >95% per year), while there is an increased risk of implant loss when 4 implants with a non-splinted anchorage are used.
-
maxillary Overdentures supported by four or six implants in the anterior region 1 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2013Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective Comparing treatment outcome of four and six bar-connected implants in the anterior maxillary region to support an overdenture during a 1-year follow-up period. Material and methods Fifty edentulous patients with lack of retention and stability of the upper denture, but with sufficient bone volume to place implants in the anterior maxillary region, were selected. Randomization assigned patients to either four or six implants. Implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, radiographic bone height changes, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. Results Forty-nine patients (one drop out) completed the 1-year follow-up. After 1year, implant survival was 100% in the four implants group and 99.3% in the six implants group (one implant lost). Overdenture survival was 100% in both groups. Mean clinical scores were low and did not differ between groups (independent Student's t-test). Mean marginal bone resorption was 0.24 +/- 0.32mm in the four implants group and 0.25 +/- 0.29mm in the six implants group. Patients' satisfaction had improved in both groups (paired Student's t-test). Conclusion Bar-supported Overdentures on four implants in the anterior maxillary region are not inferior to Overdentures supported by six bar-connected implants. Implant survival was high, peri-implant conditions were healthy and patients' satisfaction had increased significantly in both groups.
-
mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants a 10 year clinical trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2009Co-Authors: Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Rhk Batenburg, Anita Visser, Arjan VissinkAbstract:The aim of this 10-year clinical trial was to evaluate the treatment outcome (condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues, patient satisfaction, surgical and prosthetic aftercare) of mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four implants. Sixty edentulous patients with a mandibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated. Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants (group A) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants (group B). Standardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1, 5 and 10 years of functional loading. Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period, as well as patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups. In addition, no differences in satisfaction and aftercare were observed between the groups. There is no difference in the clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 10-year evaluation period. Patients of both groups were evenly satisfied with their Overdentures and received the same amount of aftercare. For reasons of cost-effectiveness, a two-implant overdenture is advised for patients with a Cawood classes IV-VI resorption of the mandible and complaints concerning retention and stability of the lower denture. To cite this article:Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 722-728.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x.
-
implant retained mandibular Overdentures versus conventional dentures 10 years of care and aftercare
International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2006Co-Authors: Anita Visser, Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Purpose: This 10-year prospective, randomized, clinical trial investigated the treatment outcome of edentulous patients treated with mandibular Overdentures retained by 2 endosseous implants compared with conventional dentures in patients with or without vestibuloplasty. Materials and Methods: One hundred fifty-one edentulous patients (5 groups) with a symphyseal mandibular bone height between 8 and 25 mm participated. Sixty-two patients were treated with an overdenture retained by 2 implants (groups 1 and 3), 59 patients were treated with a conventional denture (groups 2 and 5), and 30 patients were treated with a conventional denture after preprosthetic vestibuloplasty (group 4). Patients who received conventional dentures but preferred implants later on could undergo implant surgery after 1 year of their initial treatment, but were analyzed in their original group. The prosthetic and surgical care and aftercare were scored during a 10-year evaluation period. Results: One hundred thirty-three patients completed the 10-year follow-up evaluations. Forty-four percent of patients treated with conventional dentures switched within 10 years to implant-retained Overdentures, versus 16% of the patients who were treated with conventional dentures after vestibuloplasty. On average, a greater time investment and more treatment sessions were needed in patients treated with implant-retained Overdentures compared to patients treated with conventional dentures. Conclusion: Patients treated with an implant-retained overdenture need more treatment interventions and treatment time than patients treated with conventional dentures.
Wim Slot - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
four or six implants in the maxillary posterior region to support an overdenture 5 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2019Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Marco S. Cune, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes when providing maxillary Overdentures on four bar- and six bar-connected implants placed in the posterior region during a 5-year follow-up period. Materials and methods Sixty-six fully edentulous patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and insufficient bone volume to allow implant placement were scheduled for a maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure with bone from the anterior iliac crest and randomized to receive either four or six implants in the posterior maxilla and four implants in the mandible. After 3 months of osseointegration, a bar-supported overdenture was constructed. Maxillary implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, peri-implant bone height changes and patient satisfaction were assessed. Results Sixty patients completed the 5-year follow-up. Implant survival was 100% in the four-implant group and 99.5% in the six-implant group. No new Overdentures had to be made in the four-implant group, and three new Overdentures were made in the six-implant group due to excessive wear of the denture base and teeth (90.9% overdenture survival). Clinical parameters did not differ significantly between groups. Mean marginal bone loss compared to baseline was 0.58 +/- 0.51 mm in the four-implant group and 0.60 +/- 0.58 mm in the six-implant group, respectively. Overall, patient satisfaction improved significantly, but did not differ between groups. Conclusion Following a bilateral maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure, a bar-supported overdenture on four implants in the posterior maxillary region is not inferior to an overdenture supported by six implants after a 5-year evaluation period in patients with functional maxillary denture complaints and marked posterior resorption (Clinical trial registration number: NTR2969).
-
maxillary Overdentures supported by four or six implants in the anterior region 1 year results from a randomized controlled trial
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2013Co-Authors: Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A MeijerAbstract:Objective Comparing treatment outcome of four and six bar-connected implants in the anterior maxillary region to support an overdenture during a 1-year follow-up period. Material and methods Fifty edentulous patients with lack of retention and stability of the upper denture, but with sufficient bone volume to place implants in the anterior maxillary region, were selected. Randomization assigned patients to either four or six implants. Implant survival, overdenture survival, clinical scores, radiographic bone height changes, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. Results Forty-nine patients (one drop out) completed the 1-year follow-up. After 1year, implant survival was 100% in the four implants group and 99.3% in the six implants group (one implant lost). Overdenture survival was 100% in both groups. Mean clinical scores were low and did not differ between groups (independent Student's t-test). Mean marginal bone resorption was 0.24 +/- 0.32mm in the four implants group and 0.25 +/- 0.29mm in the six implants group. Patients' satisfaction had improved in both groups (paired Student's t-test). Conclusion Bar-supported Overdentures on four implants in the anterior maxillary region are not inferior to Overdentures supported by six bar-connected implants. Implant survival was high, peri-implant conditions were healthy and patients' satisfaction had increased significantly in both groups.
Anita Visser - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants a 10 year clinical trial
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2009Co-Authors: Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Rhk Batenburg, Anita Visser, Arjan VissinkAbstract:The aim of this 10-year clinical trial was to evaluate the treatment outcome (condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues, patient satisfaction, surgical and prosthetic aftercare) of mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four implants. Sixty edentulous patients with a mandibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated. Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants (group A) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants (group B). Standardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1, 5 and 10 years of functional loading. Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period, as well as patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups. In addition, no differences in satisfaction and aftercare were observed between the groups. There is no difference in the clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 10-year evaluation period. Patients of both groups were evenly satisfied with their Overdentures and received the same amount of aftercare. For reasons of cost-effectiveness, a two-implant overdenture is advised for patients with a Cawood classes IV-VI resorption of the mandible and complaints concerning retention and stability of the lower denture. To cite this article:Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 722-728.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x.
-
implant retained mandibular Overdentures versus conventional dentures 10 years of care and aftercare
International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2006Co-Authors: Anita Visser, Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Purpose: This 10-year prospective, randomized, clinical trial investigated the treatment outcome of edentulous patients treated with mandibular Overdentures retained by 2 endosseous implants compared with conventional dentures in patients with or without vestibuloplasty. Materials and Methods: One hundred fifty-one edentulous patients (5 groups) with a symphyseal mandibular bone height between 8 and 25 mm participated. Sixty-two patients were treated with an overdenture retained by 2 implants (groups 1 and 3), 59 patients were treated with a conventional denture (groups 2 and 5), and 30 patients were treated with a conventional denture after preprosthetic vestibuloplasty (group 4). Patients who received conventional dentures but preferred implants later on could undergo implant surgery after 1 year of their initial treatment, but were analyzed in their original group. The prosthetic and surgical care and aftercare were scored during a 10-year evaluation period. Results: One hundred thirty-three patients completed the 10-year follow-up evaluations. Forty-four percent of patients treated with conventional dentures switched within 10 years to implant-retained Overdentures, versus 16% of the patients who were treated with conventional dentures after vestibuloplasty. On average, a greater time investment and more treatment sessions were needed in patients treated with implant-retained Overdentures compared to patients treated with conventional dentures. Conclusion: Patients treated with an implant-retained overdenture need more treatment interventions and treatment time than patients treated with conventional dentures.
-
mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants a 5 year prospective study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2004Co-Authors: Anita Visser, Henny J A Meijer, Gerry M Raghoebar, Rhk Batenburg, Arjan VissinkAbstract:Objective: The aim of this 5-year prospective comparative study was to evaluate treatment outcome (survival rate, condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues, patient satisfaction, prosthetic and surgical aftercare) of mandibular Overdentures supported by two or four implants. Material and methods: Sixty edentulous patients with a mandibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated. Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants (group A) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants (group B). Standardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years of functional loading. Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period. Results: One implant was lost (group A) during the healing period. There were no significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups. None of the patients reported sensory disturbances in the lip or chin region. No differences in satisfaction were observed between the groups. With regard to aftercare, there was a tendency of a greater need of prosthetic interventions in group A, while correction of soft-tissue problems was restricted to patients of group B. Conclusion: There is no difference in clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 5-year evaluation period. Patients of both groups were as satisfied with their Overdentures.
