Rehabilitation of the Completely Edentulous Mandible by All-on-Four Treatment Concept: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Up to 10 Years Follow-Up

(1) Background and Objectives. Currently, there are no definitive long-term data about clinically significant difference in the failure of prosthesis and implant or marginal bone loss related to the rehabilitation of the completely edentulous mandible by all-on-four treatment concept. The main aim of present investigation was to report the long-term outcomes (10-years follow-up) of complete-arch mandibular rehabilitations based on the all-on-four concept. (2) Materials and Methods. Patients in need of extractions of teeth due to the occurrence of caries and/or severe periodontal disease and patients presented with edentulous mandibles were enrolled to the study. A total of 96 participants (mean follow-up period after intervention of 3185.2 days) were enrolled in the study. Participants were evaluated at the first visit, 10 days after intervention and every year after the intervention. Implant and prosthesis survival, bone loss and both local biological and mechanical complications were evaluated during the follow-up period. (3) Results. An implants’ survival rate of 97.9% was observed at the end of the follow-up period. Biological complications were reported in 19.8% of patients, whereas mechanical complications were reported in 27.1% of cases. The average marginal bone level at baseline was −0.03 mm. A significant marginal bone loss was observed after 10-years follow-up (2.5 mm). Binary logistic regression analysis showed significant association between smoke and both marginal bone loss and local biological complications. Lastly, a significant association was observed between bruxism and mechanical complications. (4) Conclusions. The high implant and prosthesis survival rate and the moderate incidence of biological and mechanical complications observed in present investigation can be associated to several factors such as high implant primary stability, prosthetic design, and control of the occlusal forces.

Tracking Tag Stabilization with a Small-Diameter Implant in an Edentulous Mandible to Assist Dynamically Navigated Surgery: A case report

This report describes the use of a temporary dental implant to secure a radiographic fiducial marker and patient tracking tag to an edentulous mandible for dynamically guided implant placement into a fibula microvascular free flap. A small diameter dental implant was placed into the anterior mandible to secure a radiographic fiducial marker followed by a patient tag. The patient tag allowed for tracking of the patient’s mandible during placement of endosseous dental implants. Four endosseous dental implants were successfully placed into the edentulous fibula free flap mandibular reconstruction. Dynamic navigation using a small diameter implant to secure radiographic fiducial markers and patient tags provides a novel technique to place implants into an edentulous microvascular free flap with minimal incision and reflection of soft tissue.

Implant Stability Changes for a Single Implant Mandibular Overdenture

Objectives To compare the changes in implant stability for the nonsubmerged and submerged protocols for a single-implant retained mandibular overdenture using Cendres and Metaux Locator attachment throughout a 24-month follow-up. Materials and Methods Eighty edentulous patients who were seeking to install a single implant in the midline of the completely edentulous mandible. At the day of implant installation, patients were randomized into two groups using sealed envelopes: the nonsubmerged and submerged groups. After 3 months of healing period, randomization using sealed envelopes was performed and patients were randomized to receive the Cendres and Metaux Locator attachment. The periotest readings were recorded using the Periotest M device, every 3 months for the first year and annually in the second year. The scope of this clinical trial focused only on results of the Cendres and Metaux attachment. Statistical Analysis The Mann–Whitney U-test was used for comparison between study groups for independent samples. Two-sided p-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results There was no statistically significant difference between the mean periotest readings of both groups throughout the 24-month follow-up. Both groups showed an improvement in mean periotest readings with the submerged group tending to show greater stability at 6, 12, and 24-month follow-ups. Conclusions The nonsubmerged and the submerged healing protocols resulted in reliable periotest readings with the submerged group showing greater improvement than the nonsubmerged, although this improvement is nonsignificant when using the Cendres and Metaux attachment for a single mandibular overdenture.

Comparison of stresses in monoblock tilted implants and conventional angled multiunit abutment-implant connection systems in the all-on-four procedure

Background The All-on-four dental implant method is an implantology method designed to provide a comfortable prosthetic treatment option by avoiding advanced surgical procedures. This research aims to compare and evaluate the stress and tension values in conventional angled multiunit abutment-implant connection systems and monoblock dental implants used in the all-on-four procedure with finite element analysis. Methods Two master models were created by placing four implants connected to multiunit abutments (group A) in the interforaminal region of a completely edentulous mandible and four monoblock implants (group B) in the same region of another completely edentulous mandible. Group A implants were classified according to their diameter as follows: 3.5 mm (M1A), 4.0 mm (M2A), and 4.5 mm (M3A). Similarly, group B implants were classified as M1B, M2B, and M3B. In the six models rehabilitated with acrylic fixed prostheses, a 100 N force was applied to the anterior implant region, and a 250 N force was applied to the posterior cantilever in both axial and 30° oblique directions. Von Mises stresses were analyzed in the bone and implant regions of all models. Results M1A and M1B, M2A and M2B, and M3A and M3B were compared with each other under axial and oblique forces. The maximum Von Mises stresses in the bone around implants and the prosthesis screws, and the maximum and minimum principal stresses in the cortical and trabecular bone in group A models were significantly higher than those in group B models. Conclusions In monoblock implant systems under axial and oblique forces, higher stress is accumulated in the bone, prosthesis screw and implant compared to multiunit abutment-implant connection systems.

Implant Treatment by Guided Surgery Supporting Overdentures in Edentulous Mandible Patients

Introduction: This study aimed to show the clinical outcomes of implants inserted by guided surgery supporting mandibular overdentures in edentulous patients. Patients and methods: Mandibular edentulous patients were diagnosed with an oral examination, cone-beam computerized tomography, and diagnostic casts for intermaxillary relations and treated with overdentures over two implants by guided surgery. After flapless surgery, implants were early loaded with an overdenture at 6 weeks. Results and discussion: Fourteen patients (nine females and five males) were treated with 28 implants. Four patients (28.6%) had a previous history of periodontitis. Five patients (35.7%) were smokers. Nine patients (64.3%) suffered from systemic diseases (i.e., diabetes, cardiovascular diseases). The clinical follow-up of the study was 44.7 ± 31.4 months. Clinical outcomes showed a global success of 100% of implants. Fourteen overdentures were placed in the patients over the implants. Mean marginal bone loss was 1.25 mm ± 0.95 mm. Four patients (28.6%) showed some kind of mechanical prosthodontic complications. Six implants (21.4%) were associated with peri-implantitis. Conclusions: This study indicates that treatment of mandibular edentulous patients with overdentures by guided surgery and early loading of implants placed appears to be a successful implant protocol.