Premium
Implant‐retained mandibular overdentures with ITI implants
Author(s) -
Romeo Eugenio,
Chiapasco Matteo,
Lazza Andrea,
Casentini Paolo,
Ghisolfi Marco,
Iorio Marco,
Vogel Giorgio
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130508.x
Subject(s) - medicine , dentistry , osseointegration , implant , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , dental abutments , radiography , bone resorption , orthodontics , surgery , botany , biology , genus
This prospective study has been designed to compare the results of immediate and delayed loading of implant‐retained mandibular overdentures after a 2‐year follow‐up. Twenty patients have been randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 patients (test group) received four ITI implants in the intraforaminal area of the mandible. Octa® abutments were immediately screwed on implants; 2 days after surgery, the implants were rigidly connected with a U‐shaped Dolder gold bar and loaded with an overdenture. Group 2 patients (control group) received, in the same area, the same type and number of implants, which were left to heal according to the standard protocol. At 3–4 months, Octa abutments were screwed on the implants and the same prosthetic procedure of the test group was applied. The minimum follow‐up period lasted 2 years, with recall appointments at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 months, 1 year and every following year postoperatively, evaluating: MPI, MBI, PD, Periotest® and radiographic peri‐implant bone resorption. Success criteria according to Albrektsson et al. were used. Only one implant out of the 40 of group 2 failed, whereas none failed in group 1. No statistical difference of the clinical parameters evaluated was noticed in the two groups. Therefore, immediate loading of implants, if connected with a U‐shaped bar, can provide the same results of the ‘traditional’ technique as far as osseointegration and short‐term survival rates of implants are concerned. Moreover, this method significantly shortens the treatment period, thus increasing patient satisfaction.