The effect of different implant location in mandibular implant assisted partial overdentures restoring Kennedy class I cases on peri-implant bone level changes and patient’s satisfaction | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 28, Volume 68, Issue 3 - Serial Number 4, July 2022, Page 2743-2754 PDF (1.17 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2022.117543.1958 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Mona Aboelnagga   ; mahmoud El Homossany
| ||||
| Associate Professor, Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The objective was to evaluate and compare two different implant locations, premolar and molar region, in mandibular implant-assisted partial overdentures restoring Kennedy classI. Parameters of evaluation were peri-implant bone level changes, pocket depth around abutments and patient’s satisfaction. Materials and method: Twenty-eight patients with mandibular first premolar last-standing tooth opposing dentate maxilla were selected. Chromium-cobalt RPD was constructed for all patients. Participants randomly allocated into two groups. In group I implant was placed in premolar area while in group II implant was placed in second molar area. Implants were inserted using two-stage surgical technique following conventional loading protocol. After 3months, attachments were picked-up and the prosthesis was delivered. Pocket depth around last abutment and peri-implant marginal bone height were evaluated at loading time, after 6,9,12and 18 months. After sixth month, participants answered satisfaction questionnaire. Data collected were analyzed statistically. Results: Statistically significant higher mean bone loss was found around implants in groupI compared to groupII. Besides, significant higher loss was found after 9m,12m and 18m compared to 6m in each group. Also, statistically significant higher mean pocket depth in groupI compared to groupII after 6m and 18m, and after 9m,12m and 18m compared to 6m in each group. Visual analogue scale showed statistically significant higher pain score in groupII regarding mastication. Conclusion: Placing implant at premolar site caused less periodontal disease to last abutment and more peri-implant marginal bone loss. Patient’s satisfaction wasn’t affected by different implant location, except for mastication; patients with implants in molar region were more satisfied. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Implant location; partial denture; free-end saddle; assisted overdenture; and patient satisfaction | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 257 PDF Download: 282 |
||||
