Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-06-02, 10:40:19 | version 1.38.0
T w o i m p l a n t s s u p p o r t i n g a m a n d i b u l a r o v e r d e n t u r e Two implants supporting a mandibular over denture to rehabilitate Cawood and Howell Class V and VI patients: a proof-of-concept study Erta Xhanari,a, b Roberto Scrascia,c Blerina Kadiub & Marco Tallaricoa, d a Aldent University, Tirana, Albania b Private practice, Tirana, Albania c Private practice, Taranto, Italy d Osstem AIC, Italy; private practice, Rome, Italy C o r r e s p o n d i n g a u t h o r : Dr. Erta Xhanari Rr. Sulejman Delvina, 19 1001 Tirana Albania info@ertaxhanari.com H o w t o c i t e t h i s a r t i c l e : Xhanari E, Scrascia R, Kadiu B, Tallarico M. Two implants supporting a mandibular overdenture to rehabilitate Cawood and Howell Class V and VI patients: a proof-of-concept study. J Oral Science Rehabilitation. 2017 Jun;3(1):52–9. Abstract O b j e c t i v e The objective of this study was to present the preliminary results one year after loading for a single cohort of Cawood and Howell Class V and VI patients rehabilitated with a mandibular overdenture supported by two implants using a novel low-profile retention system. M a t e r i a l s a n d m e t h o d s Completely edentulous individuals, aged 18 years or older at the time of implant placement, presenting as Class V or VI according to Cawood and Howell were enrolled and treated with two implants, low-profile direct implant overdenture attachments and a removable complete mandibu- lar denture. Outcome measures were success rates of the implants and prosthesis, complications, marginal bone levels, bleeding index, plaque index and patient satisfaction (Oral Health Impact Profile). R e s u l t s A total of 18 Osstem TSIII implants (diameter: nine regular and nine mini) were placed in nine consecutive edentulous patients (seven female and two male) presenting with Cawood and Howell Class V (n = 6) or VI (n = 3) mandibular atrophy. The average age of the patients was 68 (range: 53–77). The participants were followed up for a minimum of one year (mean: 18.2 months; range: 12–22) after definitive loading. No partici- pants dropped out, and no deviation from the original protocol occurred. At the one-year follow-up, no implants or prosthesis had failed, resulting in cumulative implant and prosthetic survival rates of 100%. No biolog- ical or technical complications occurred during the follow-up, resulting in cumulative implant and prosthetic success rates of 100%. At the one- year follow-up, the mean marginal bone loss was 0.39 ± 0.15 mm. The Oral Health Impact Profile summary scores demonstrated a significant decrease one month after prosthesis delivery (p = 0.0000) and between the one-month and one-year follow-ups (p = 0.0005), after retention system replacement. At the one-year follow-up, the bleeding index was 8.3% and the plaque index was 9.7%. C o n c l u s i o n Within the limitations of this study, a mandibular overdenture support- ed by two implants can be considered an effective and predictable option 52 Volume 3 | Issue 2/2017 Journal of Oral Science & Rehabilitation