Bar versus resilient stud anchors used for immediately loaded 2 implants assisting overdentures in patients with history of periodontitis. One-year randomized controlled clinical study. | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 4, Volume 68, Issue 1 - Serial Number 3, January 2022, Page 339-353 PDF (2.14 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2021.96876.1793 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Ramy Ali 1; Khaled Selim2; Shaimaa Nasr  3
| ||||
| 1Lecturer, Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Lecturer, Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Lecturer, Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Egyptt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim: This randomized controlled study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes of bar versus resilient stud (locator) anchors used for immediately loaded 2 implants assisting overdentures in patients with history of periodontitis Materials and methods: Twelve completely edentulous patients with a history of chronic periodontitis were randomly classified into 2 groups; Group 1 (locator group); included six participants who received resilient stud (Locator) attachments for overdentures. Group 2 (bar group); included six participants who received bar attachments for overdentures. All patients received 2 implants in the cuspid regions of the mandible using computer guided flapless surgical approach and the implants were immediately loaded with overdentures. Clinical outcomes (implant survival, plaque scores, gingival scores, probing depth, stability of implants, width of keratinized mucosa, and crestal bone loss) were measured at overdenture insertion, 6 and 12 months later. Results: Plaque and gingival indices, pocket depth, and crestal bone loss increased significantly with time in both groups. Implant stability significantly decreased in locator group and significantly increased with bar group with advance of time. Keratinized mucosal width significantly diminished with time for both attachments. Bar group recorded significant higher plaque and gingival indices, and stability of implants than locator group. On the other hand, Locator group recorded recoded significant higher marginal bone loss than bar group. Conclusion: Within the limits of this study, Bar attachments are recommended to assist overdentures to immediate loaded implants in subjects with history of periodontitis. However, it is accompanied by increased plaque and gingival scores than Locator attachment. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Chronic periodontitis; Bar attachment; Locators | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 157 PDF Download: 143 |
||||
