Résumé
OBJECTIVES@#In mandibular edentulism, the treatment option with a two-interforaminal implant-retained bridge and a removable partial denture is rarely evaluated in literature. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the stress distribution of this treatment option by comparing it with traditional treatment options with interforaminal implants in the edentulous mandible.@*MATERIALS AND METHODS@#Two interforaminal implants were placed in a formalin-fixed cadaver mandible, and overdentures with three different types of attachments were fabricated: (1) two ball attachments and an overdenture, (2) a Dolder bar and an overdenture, and (3) screw-retained two-implant inter-canine porcelain fused to a metal bridge and an implant-assisted removable denture (IARD) with precision attachments. Three biting conditions were generated for each denture type, and the strains were documented under vertical loading of 100 N.@*RESULTS@#The calculated strain values from measured strains in all measurement sites and loading conditions for the screw-retained two-implant inter-canine porcelain fused to a metal bridge and a cast framework partial denture with precision attachments situation were lower than in the other scenarios (P<0.05).@*CONCLUSION@#Within the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that an IARD may be a reasonable and valuable alternative to ball attachments or a bar in two interforaminal implants, especially when the patients prefer to be able to show their teeth even when they take out their removable dentures.
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: In mandibular edentulism, the treatment option with a two-interforaminal implant-retained bridge and a removable partial denture is rarely evaluated in literature. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the stress distribution of this treatment option by comparing it with traditional treatment options with interforaminal implants in the edentulous mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two interforaminal implants were placed in a formalin-fixed cadaver mandible, and overdentures with three different types of attachments were fabricated: (1) two ball attachments and an overdenture, (2) a Dolder bar and an overdenture, and (3) screw-retained two-implant inter-canine porcelain fused to a metal bridge and an implant-assisted removable denture (IARD) with precision attachments. Three biting conditions were generated for each denture type, and the strains were documented under vertical loading of 100 N. RESULTS: The calculated strain values from measured strains in all measurement sites and loading conditions for the screw-retained two-implant inter-canine porcelain fused to a metal bridge and a cast framework partial denture with precision attachments situation were lower than in the other scenarios (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that an IARD may be a reasonable and valuable alternative to ball attachments or a bar in two interforaminal implants, especially when the patients prefer to be able to show their teeth even when they take out their removable dentures.