An innovative design in a mandibular overdenture with too-lingualy-inserted implants: A case report
AbstractProsthetic rehabilitation of patients with unfavorable-implant-position or problematic implant angulationis complicated. A completely-edentulous-patient with lower lip squamous-cell-carcinoma had undergone resective surgery twice. After radiotherapy of a total dose of 60cGy of 30 sessionsfor about 3 months, moderate trismus was developed. Mouth commisurotomy was accomplished in order to insert three implants in the mandibular-anterior-region. Two distal implants were excessively tilted to achieve better biomechanical advantages and to obtain greater anterior-posterior-distance which made prosthetic rehabilitation of the patient challenging. In the mandibular-custom-tray a lingual “window” was designed to accommodate the open-impression-copings.Trial-denture-bases were tried-in. A putty index was recorded from arranged-mandibular-teeth. According to this index, a zigzag bar similar to letter “M” was designed using custom abutments. So that three ball anchors were placed on this “M-designed-bar” (MDB) more labial than the insertedimplants to support the mandibular-implant-supported-overdenture. Using MDB permits teeth-set-up with minimal interfere with tongue function. The major disadvantage of this design is its inevitable-buccal-cantilever. Distolingual areas of mandibular tray were border-molded excessively in order to overcome this problem and to increase stability and also to reduce detrimental-lateral forces to implants.Key words: Dental Implants, Implant-Supported Denture Prosthesis.
Batenburg RH, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A. Treatment concept for mandibular overden- tures supported by endosseous implants: a litera- ture review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998;13(4):539-45.
Barão VAR, Assunção WG, Tabata LF, Delben JA, Gomes ÉA, de Sousa EAC, et al. Finite element analysis to compare complete denture and im- plant-retained overdentures with different attach- ment systems. J Craniofac Surg. 2009; 20(4):1066-71.
Naert I, Quirynen M, Theuniers G, van Steen- berghe D. Prosthetic aspects of osseointegrated fixtures supporting overdentures. A 4-year re- port. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 1991.;65(5):671-80.
Naert I, Gizani S, Vuylsteke M, Van Steenberghe D. A 5‐year prospective randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction. J Oral Rehabil. 1999; 26(3):195-202.
Hemmings KW, Schmitt A, Zarb GA. Complica- tions and maintenance requirements for fixed prostheses and overdentures in the edentulous mandible: a 5-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994;9(2).
Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Brånemark P-I, Jemt T. Longterm follow-up study of osseointe- grated implants in the treatment of totally eden- tulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5(4):347-59.
Merickske-Stern R. Clinical evaluation of overden ture restorations supported by osseointegrated ti- tanium implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5(4).
Engquist B, Bergendal T, Kallus T, Linden U. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseointe- grated implants supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1988;3(2).
Heckmann SM, Wichmann MG, Winter W, Meyer M, Weber HP. Overdenture attachment selection and the loading of implant and denture‐bearing area. Part 2: A methodical study using five types of attachment. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12(6):640-7.
Trakas T, Michalakis K, Kang K, Hirayama H. At- tachment systems for implant retained overden- tures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2006;15(1):24-34.
Yokoyama S, Wakabayashi N, Shiota M, Ohyama T. The influence of implant location and length on stress distribution for three-unit implant-support- ed posterior cantilever fixed partial dentures. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2004;91(3):234-40.
Sertgöz A, Güvener S. Finite element analysis of the effect of cantilever and implant length on stress distribution in an implant-supported fixed prosthesis. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.1996; 76(2):165-9.
Wennström J, Zurdo J, Karlsson S, Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl K, Lindhe J. Bone level change at im- plant‐supported fixed partial dentures with and without cantilever extension after 5 years in function. J Clin Periodontol. 2004; 31(12):1077-83.
White S, Caputo A, Anderkvist T. Effect of canti- lever length on stress transfer by implant-support- ed prostheses. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.1994; 71(5):493-9.
Naert I, Quirynen M, Hooghe M, van Steenberghe D. A comparative prospective study of splinted and unsplinted Branemark implants in mandib- ular overdenture therapy: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Dent. 1994; 71(5):486-92.
Celik G, Uludag B. Photoelastic stress analysis of various retention mechanisms on 3-implant-re tained mandibular overdentures. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2007; 97(4):229-35.
Tashkandi EA, Lang BR, Edge MJ. Analysis of strain at selected bone sites of a cantilevered im plant-supported prosthesis. The Journal of pros- thetic dentistry. 1996; 76(2):158-64.
Sadowsky SJ, Caputo AA. Stress transfer of four mandibular implant overdenture cantilever de- signs. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2004;92(4):328-36.
A signature of author below certifies compliance with the following statements:
Copyright transfer; in signing this Agreement:
1. I hereby warrant that this article is an original work, has not been published before and is not being considered for publication elsewhere in its final form either in printed or electronic form;
2. I hereby warrant that you have obtained permission from the copyright holder to reproduce in the Article (in all media including print and electronic form) material not owned by you, and that you have acknowledged the source;
3. I hereby warrant that this article contains no violation of any existing copyright, moral rights or other third party right or any material of an obscene, indecent, defamatory or otherwise unlawful nature and that to the best of your knowledge this Article does not infringe the rights of others;
4. I hereby warrant that in the case of a multi-authored Article you have obtained, in writing, authorization to enter into this Agreement on their behalf and that all co-authors have read and agreed the terms of this agreement;
5. I warrant that any formula or dosage given is accurate and will not if properly followed injure any person;
6. I have made a significant scientific contribution to the study and I have read the complete manuscript and take responsibility for the content and completeness of the final surmised manuscript;
7. I will indemnify and keep indemnified the Editors, the Journal's Editor against all claims and expenses (including legal costs and expenses) arising from any breach of this warranty and the other warranties on your behalf in this Agreement.
Conflict of interest disclosure
All institutional or corporeal affixations of mine and all funding sources for the study are acknowledged. I certify that I have no commercial association that might represent a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted manuscript.