Mandibular implant-supported overdenture using CAD-CAM Konus type attachment: A case report / 대한치과보철학회지

In edentulous mandible, implant supported overdenture was considered as a first treatment option. Konus type attachment supplies rigid support and cross arch stabilization so that more favorable force transmission and distribution can be attained. In the dentistry, computer aided design-computer aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) system makes it possible to fabricate restorations with high precision and effectiveness. Recently, Palladium-silver (Pd-Ag) alloy which is millable has been developed. This article presents that application of CAD-CAM Konus type attachment can be provide satisfactory stability and function on four-implant supported mandibular overdenture.

Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution on Telescopic System for Mandibular Implant Supported Overdenture / 대한치과보철학회지

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the stress distribution in mandibular implant overdentures with telescopic crowns compared to bar attachment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three-dimensional finite element models consisting of the mandibular bone, 4 implants, and primary bar-splinted superstructure or secondary splinted superstructure with telescopic crowns were created. Vertical and oblique loads were directed onto the occlusal areas of the superstructures to simulate the maximal intercuspal contacts and working contacts such as group function occlusion. Maximum stress and stress distribution were analysed in mandibular bone, implant abutments, and superstructures. RESULTS: 1. In comparison of von Mises stress on mandibular bone, telescopic overdenture had a little lower stress values in vertical load and working side load except oblique load. In the mandible, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress than the bar overdenture. 2. In comparison of von Mises stress on implant abutments, telescopic overdenture had much lower stress values in all load conditions. In implant abutments, the telescopic overdenture distributed stress similar to the bar overdenture. Stress was concentrated on the distal surfaces of the posterior implant abutments in both mandibular overdentures. 3. In comparison of von Mises stress on superstructures, the telescopic overdenture had much more stress values in all load conditions. However, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress on superstructure than the bar overdenture. In the bar overdenture, stress was concentrated on each cental area of bar structures and connected area between implant abutments and bar structures. CONCLUSION: In the results of this study, the telescopic overdenture had lower stress values than the bar overdenture in mandibular bone and implant abutments, but more stress values in superstructures. However, if optimal material was selected in making superstructures, the telescopic overdenture was compared to the bar overdenture in stress distribution.