Single Soft Tissue Support versus Dual Tooth-Tissue Support for Clasp-Less Mesial Implant Retained Mandibular Class I Rpd: Cross-Over Clinical Study

A. Mostafa
{"title":"Single Soft Tissue Support versus Dual Tooth-Tissue Support for Clasp-Less Mesial Implant Retained Mandibular Class I Rpd: Cross-Over Clinical Study","authors":"A. Mostafa","doi":"10.21608/mjd.2023.301977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Objective: T o evaluate the single soft tissue support versus dual tooth-tissue support for mesial implant retained RPD. Materials and Methods: This clinical cross-over study included 10 partially edentulous patients with the only remaining mandibular six anterior teeth. Every patient received two mandibular implants at the 1 st premolar region. Two mandibular implants' retained partial overdentures were constructed with two different support concepts, two different designs, opposing a maxillary single denture. One of the dentures was done with a design based mainly on soft tissue support but the other denture was done with a dual tooth-tissue support design. The effects of each RPD design were studied after 1, and 5 years. The following clinical parameters were evaluated: the plaque index (PI), the bleeding index (BI), and the probing depth (PD). The peri-implant bone level changes, and alveolar bone level changes of the canine and residual ridge bone level were assessed on digital radiographs using the Corel-Draw program. The SPSS program was used for statistical analysis. Results: After 1 and 5 years of follow-up for each supporting concept of RPD, no implant failures were noted. No significant differences in soft tissue clinical parameters BI, PI, and PIP were found between the 2 designs with regard to the canine and implant, or peri-implant bone resorption. On the other hand, there was a significant difference after 1 year regarding alveolar bone loss of the canine (P=.002) and residual ridge bone loss (P=.0001) and after 5 years for the canine alveolar bone where (P= .015). Regarding residual ridge bone loss, there was a distal descending pattern of bone resorption in the dual support design. The bone loss was increased with the dual support design (P=.0001). Conclusions: within the limits of this study, single soft tissue support for mesial implant retained removable partial overdenture was recommended versus dual tooth support. Single soft tissue support preserves the remaining structures.","PeriodicalId":308616,"journal":{"name":"Mansoura Journal of Dentistry","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mansoura Journal of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/mjd.2023.301977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: Objective: T o evaluate the single soft tissue support versus dual tooth-tissue support for mesial implant retained RPD. Materials and Methods: This clinical cross-over study included 10 partially edentulous patients with the only remaining mandibular six anterior teeth. Every patient received two mandibular implants at the 1 st premolar region. Two mandibular implants' retained partial overdentures were constructed with two different support concepts, two different designs, opposing a maxillary single denture. One of the dentures was done with a design based mainly on soft tissue support but the other denture was done with a dual tooth-tissue support design. The effects of each RPD design were studied after 1, and 5 years. The following clinical parameters were evaluated: the plaque index (PI), the bleeding index (BI), and the probing depth (PD). The peri-implant bone level changes, and alveolar bone level changes of the canine and residual ridge bone level were assessed on digital radiographs using the Corel-Draw program. The SPSS program was used for statistical analysis. Results: After 1 and 5 years of follow-up for each supporting concept of RPD, no implant failures were noted. No significant differences in soft tissue clinical parameters BI, PI, and PIP were found between the 2 designs with regard to the canine and implant, or peri-implant bone resorption. On the other hand, there was a significant difference after 1 year regarding alveolar bone loss of the canine (P=.002) and residual ridge bone loss (P=.0001) and after 5 years for the canine alveolar bone where (P= .015). Regarding residual ridge bone loss, there was a distal descending pattern of bone resorption in the dual support design. The bone loss was increased with the dual support design (P=.0001). Conclusions: within the limits of this study, single soft tissue support for mesial implant retained removable partial overdenture was recommended versus dual tooth support. Single soft tissue support preserves the remaining structures.
单软组织支持与双牙组织支持用于下颌无卡环内系种植体I类Rpd:交叉临床研究
目的:评价单牙组织支持与双牙组织支持在近缘种植体保留RPD中的应用效果。材料与方法:本临床交叉研究包括10例仅剩6颗前牙的部分无牙患者。每位患者在第1前磨牙区接受2颗下颌种植体。采用两种不同的支撑概念,两种不同的设计,构建两种下颌种植体保留部分覆盖义齿,与上颌单义齿相对立。其中一个假牙的设计主要基于软组织支撑而另一个假牙的设计是双重牙齿组织支撑。分别在1年和5年后研究每种RPD设计的效果。评估以下临床参数:斑块指数(PI)、出血指数(BI)和探探深度(PD)。使用Corel-Draw程序在数字x线片上评估种植体周围骨水平变化,犬牙槽骨水平变化和残余脊骨水平。采用SPSS软件进行统计分析。结果:经过1年和5年的RPD支持概念随访,没有发现种植失败。两种设计在犬和种植体、种植体周围骨吸收方面的软组织临床参数BI、PI和PIP均无显著差异。另一方面,1年后犬牙槽骨丢失(P= 0.002)和残余脊骨丢失(P= 0.0001)与5年后犬牙槽骨丢失(P= 0.015)存在显著差异。对于残余脊骨丢失,双支撑设计中存在远端骨吸收下降模式。双支架设计增加了骨质流失(P= 0.0001)。结论:在本研究范围内,与双牙支持相比,单软组织支持推荐用于近缘种植保留可移动部分覆盖义齿。单一的软组织支撑保留了剩余的结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信