ABSTRACT
La rehabilitación de pacientes desdentados parciales periodontalmente comprometidos es un desafío a nivel protésico. Esto se debe a que la condición de los dientes pilares no siempre es la adecuada, viéndose afectada la proporción corono-radicular por las secuelas de una enfermedad periodontal. Es en estas situaciones límite donde el uso de implantes óseo-integrados acompañado de ataches resilientes mejora la retención de una prótesis parcial removible convencional, disminuyendo el riesgo de sobrecarga en los dientes remanentes. En este reporte de caso se presenta una rehabilitación integral, resuelto con una sobredentadura parcial maxilar sin cobertura palatina sobre pilares Locator®, minimizando la carga en los dientes remanentes del grupo II con secuelas periodontales; y una rehabilitación del arco mandibular con operatoria directa, indirecta y prótesis fija, recuperando funcionalidad, soporte oclusal y manteniendo los dientes remanentes en el sector anterior.
Rehabilitation of periodontally compromised partially edentulous patients has always been a challenge at the prosthetic level, because the condition of the remaining teeth is not always adequate and the crown-root ratio is often affected by the sequelae of periodontal disease. In these borderline situations, the use of osseointegrated implants accompanied by resilient attachments improves the retention of a conventional removable partial denture, reducing the risk of overloading the remaining teeth. This case report presents a comprehensive rehabilitation, resolved with a maxillary partial overdenture without palatal coverage on Locator® abutments, minimizing the load on the remaining pieces of group II with periodontal sequelae; and a rehabilitation of the mandibular arch with direct, indirect and fixed prosthesis. In this way, it was possible to recover functionality, occlusal support and keep the remaining teeth in the front part of the maxilla.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To present a literature review on implant overdentures after a brief survey of bone loss after extraction of all teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Papers on alveolar bone loss and implant overdentures have been studied for a narrative review. RESULTS: Bone loss of the alveolar process after tooth extraction occurs with great individual variation, impossible to predict at the time of extraction. The simplest way to prevent bone loss is to avoid extraction of all teeth. To keep a few teeth and use them or their roots for a tooth or root-supported overdenture substantially reduces bone loss. Jaws with implant-supported prostheses show less bone loss than jaws with conventional dentures. Mandibular 2-implant overdentures provide patients with better outcomes than do conventional dentures, regarding satisfaction, chewing ability and oral-health-related quality of life. There is no strong evidence for the superiority of one overdenture retention-system over the others regarding patient satisfaction, survival, peri-implant bone loss and relevant clinical factors. Mandibular single midline implant overdentures have shown promising results but long-term results are not yet available. For a maxillary overdenture 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar provide high survival both for implants and overdenture. CONCLUSION: In edentulous mandibles, 2-implant overdentures provide excellent long-term success and survival, including patient satisfaction and improved oral functions. To further reduce the costs a single midline implant overdenture can be a promising option. In the maxilla, overdentures supported on 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar have demonstrated good functional results.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To present a literature review on implant overdentures after a brief survey of bone loss after extraction of all teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Papers on alveolar bone loss and implant overdentures have been studied for a narrative review. RESULTS: Bone loss of the alveolar process after tooth extraction occurs with great individual variation, impossible to predict at the time of extraction. The simplest way to prevent bone loss is to avoid extraction of all teeth. To keep a few teeth and use them or their roots for a tooth or root-supported overdenture substantially reduces bone loss. Jaws with implant-supported prostheses show less bone loss than jaws with conventional dentures. Mandibular 2-implant overdentures provide patients with better outcomes than do conventional dentures, regarding satisfaction, chewing ability and oral-health-related quality of life. There is no strong evidence for the superiority of one overdenture retention-system over the others regarding patient satisfaction, survival, peri-implant bone loss and relevant clinical factors. Mandibular single midline implant overdentures have shown promising results but long-term results are not yet available. For a maxillary overdenture 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar provide high survival both for implants and overdenture. CONCLUSION: In edentulous mandibles, 2-implant overdentures provide excellent long-term success and survival, including patient satisfaction and improved oral functions. To further reduce the costs a single midline implant overdenture can be a promising option. In the maxilla, overdentures supported on 4 to 6 implants splinted with a bar have demonstrated good functional results.
Subject(s)
Humans , Alveolar Bone Loss , Alveolar Process , Denture, Overlay , Dentures , Jaw , Jaw, Edentulous , Mandible , Mastication , Maxilla , Patient Satisfaction , Prostheses and Implants , Quality of Life , Splints , Tooth , Tooth ExtractionABSTRACT
Mandibular implant overdentures have established and predictable benefits over traditional mucosa-borne mandibular dentures and now form part of mainstream dentistry. Maxillary implant overdentures present a number of different challenges. This selective review highlights the paucity of evidence and inconsistent findings in the maxillary implant overdenture literature.
