Premium
Five‐year clinical trial using three attachment systems for implant overdentures
Author(s) -
Cristache Corina Marilena,
Muntianu Ligia Adriana Stanca,
Burlibasa Mihai,
Didilescu Andreea Cristiana
Publication year - 2014
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 - 10.1111/clr.12086
Subject(s) - implant , dentistry , medicine , group b , randomized controlled trial , clinical trial , subgroup analysis , orthodontics , surgery , meta analysis
Objective The objective is to compare, in a prospective randomized clinical trial, three types of attachment systems for mandibular implant overdenture, focusing on costs, maintenance requirements and complications from baseline to the end of 5‐year follow‐up period. Materials and Methods Sixty‐nine fully mandibular and fully/partially maxillary edentulous patients received two screw‐type Straumann implants, in the mandibular canine region. New overdentures with three types of attachment systems were inserted according to an early‐loading protocol: Group B (balls, divided into Subgroup B.1 – retentive anchor with gold matrix and Subgroup B.2 – retentive anchor with titanium matrix) ( n = 23), Group M (magnets) ( n = 23) and Group L (locator) ( n = 23). Results The highest maintenance event number (195) was observed in Group B vs. 31 in Group L and 15 in Group M. Significantly more complications were recorded in Subgroup B.1 than in Subgroup B.2, Group M and Group L ( P < 0.05). Group M registered the highest prosthetic success (82.6%) in the 5 years, followed by Group L (78.2%). Subgroup B.1 had the lowest success rate (50%). The magnet group recorded statistically significant higher costs, comparing with the other two groups ( P < 0.05). Conclusions The three attachment systems functioned well after 5 years. The magnets had a low maintenance requirement and high success rate, despite the relatively increased initial costs. Retentive anchor with titanium matrix and locator may be a better choice from a financial point of view, taking into consideration the initial low cost of the components and also the reduced number of complications.