• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.313-320
• /
• 2016

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical findings and patient satisfaction on implant overdenture designed with Locator implant attachment or Locator bar attachment in mandibular edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, probing depth, peri-implant inflammation, bleeding, plaque, calculus, complications, and satisfaction were evaluated on sixteen patients who were treated with mandibular overdenture and have used it for at least 1 year (Locator implant attachment: n=8, Locator bar attachment: n=8). RESULTS. Marginal bone loss, probing depth, plaque index of the Locator bar attachment group were significantly lower than the Locator implant attachment group (P<.05). There was no significant difference on bleeding, peri-implant inflammation, and patient satisfaction between the two denture types (P>.05). The replacement of the attachment components was the most common complication in both groups. Although there was no correlation between marginal bone loss and plaque index, a significant correlation was found between marginal bone loss and probing depth. CONCLUSION. The Locator bar attachment group indicates lesser marginal bone loss and need for maintenance, as compared with the Locator implant attachment group. This may be due to the splinting effect among implants rather than the types of Locator attachment.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.54 no.12
• /
• pp.1024-1034
• /
• 2016

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare the type and frequency of prosthetic complications associated with attachment types for implant overdenture. Material and methods. In this retrospective study, 38 patients (mean age, 63.5 years) have been treated with implant overdentures from 2007 to 2014. Ten patients received a bar-clip attachment. Eleven patients had received a milled bar with Locator attachment. Seventeen patients had received a Locator attachment. The mean follow-up period was 36.9 months (range, 15-83 months). The type and frequency of prosthetic complications was recorded. The frequency was analyzed to determine the statistical difference among the 3 different attachments by using one-way ANOVA (${\alpha}=.05$) and Bonferroni post hoc method at a 5% level of significance. Results. The total number of prosthetic complications was higher in the bar-clip attachment (55 events) than in the milled bar with Locator attachment (39 events) and the Locator attachment (34 events). There were no statistically significant differences, and the most common prosthetic complication was the loss of retention. In the bar-clip attachment group, the average frequency of prosthetic complications was 3.0 events per prosthesis during the first year. In the milled bar with Locator attachment and Locator attachment groups, the average frequencies were 1.45 events and 2.35 events, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed in the frequency of the complication. (p = .043) Conclusions. Compared to the bar-clip attachment, implant overdentures that use milled bars with the Locator attachment have a significantly lower incidence of prosthetic complications in the first year of follow-up after placement.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.223-231
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this case report is to introduce new attachment system(milled titanium bar with $Locator^{(R)}$ attachment) for implant supported overdenture in maxillary edentulous patients. A 56-years-old male patient visited the hospital due to the mobility of his maxillary fixed partial dentures(10-unit bridge). Including temporomandibular joint(TMJ), there was no specific PMHs to influence dental treatment. In radiographic and clinical evaluation, there was a severe bone resorption and mobility in maxillary teeth. Accordingly all the remaining maxillary teeth was extracted and fabrication of implant supported overdenture was planned. The milled titanium bar with $Locator^{(R)}$ was designed as an attachment system, considering the stability and retention of denture, masticatory efficiency, oral hygiene care, esthetics, pronunciation, and patient's financial state. The milled titanium bar was manufactured using CAD/CAM technology, and $Locator^{(R)}$ attachment connected to the bar by tap & drill method. For over 1-year, in terms of function and esthetics, satisfactory result was obtained.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.64-70
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this case report is to introduce milled titanium bar with Locator$^{(R)}$ that made by CAD/CAM for implant supported overdenture in maxillary edentulous patients. For over 2 years, in terms of function and esthetics, satisfactory result was obtained.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.12-21
• /
• 2022

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to investigate changes in retention and wear pattern of Locator^® and ADD-TOC attachments on a digital milled bar by performing chewing simulation and repeated insertion/removal of prostheses in fully edentulous models. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Locator (Locator^®; Zest Anchors Inc., Escondido, CA, USA) was selected as the control group and ADD-TOC (ADD-TOC; PNUAdd Co., Ltd., Busan, Republic of Korea) as the experimental group. A CAD-CAM milled bar was mounted on a master model and 3 threaded holes for connecting a bar attachment was formed using a tap. Locator and ADD-TOC attachments were then attached to the milled bar. Simulated mastication and repeated insertion/removal were performed over 400,000 cyclic loadings and 1,080 insertions/removals, respectively. Wear patterns on deformed attachment were investigated by field emission scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS. For the ADD-TOC attachments, chewing simulation and repeated insertion/removal resulted in a mean initial retentive force of 24.43 ± 4.89 N, which were significantly lower than that of the Locator attachment, 34.33 ± 8.25 N (P < .05). Amounts of retention loss relative to baseline for the Locator and ADD-TOC attachments were 21.74 ± 7.07 and 8.98 ± 5.76 N (P < .05). CONCLUSION. CAD-CAM milled bar with the ADD-TOC attachment had a lower initial retentive force than the Locator attachment. However, the ADD-TOC attachment might be suitable for long-term use as it showed less deformation and had a higher retentive force after simulated mastication and insertion/removal repetitions.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.207-214
• /
• 2015

Due to the limitations of conventional removable partial denture prostheses to treat a cleft lip & palate patient who shows scar tissue on upper lip, excessive absorption of the maxillary residual alveolar ridge, and class III malocclusion with narrow palate and undergrowth of the maxilla, 4 implants were placed on the maxillary edentulous region and a maxillary removable implant-supported partial denture was planned using a CAD/CAM milled titanium bar. Unlike metal or gold casting technique which has shrinkage after the molding, CAD/CAM milled titanium bar is highly-precise, economical and lightweight. In practice, however, it is very hard to obtain accurate friction-fit from the milled bar and reduction in retention can occur due to repetitive insertion and removal of the denture. Various auxiliary retention systems (e.g. $ERA^{(R)}$, $CEKA^{(R)}$, magnetics, $Locator^{(R)}$ attachment), in order to deal with these problems, can be used to obtain additional retention, cost-effectiveness and ease of replacement. Out of diverse auxiliary attachments, $Locator^{(R)}$ has characteristics that are dual retentive, minimal in vertical height and convenient of attachment replacement. Drill and tapping method is simple and the replacement of the metal female part of $Locator^{(R)}$ attachment is convenient. In this case, the $Locator^{(R)}$ attachment is connected to the milled titanium bar fabricated by CAD/CAM, using the drill and tapping technique. Afterward, screw holes were formed and 3 $Locator^{(R)}$ attachments were secured with 20 Ncm holding force for additional retention. Following this procedure, satisfactory results were obtained in terms of aesthetic facial form, masticatory function and denture retention, and I hereby report this case.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.9 no.3
• /
• pp.143-151
• /
• 2017

PURPOSE. The design of the attachment must provide an optimum stress distribution around the implant. In this study, for implant overdentures with a bar/clip attachment or a locator attachment, the stress transmitted to the implant in accordance with the change in the denture base length and the vertical pressure was measured and analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Test model was created with epoxy resin. The strain gauges made a tight contact with implant surfaces. A universal testing machine was used to exert a vertical pressure on the mandibular implant overdenture and the strain rate of the implants was measured. RESULTS. Means and standard deviations of the maximum micro-deformation rates were determined. 1) Locator attachment: The implants on the working side generally showed higher strain than those on the non-working side. Tensile force was observed on the mesial surface of the implant on the working side, and the compressive force was applied to the buccal surface and on the surfaces of the implant on the non-working side. 2) Bar/clip attachment: The implants on the both non-working and working sides showed high strain; all surfaces except the mesial surface of the implant on the non-working side showed a compressive force. CONCLUSION. To minimize the strain on implants in mandibular implant overdentures, the attachment of the implant should be carefully selected and the denture base should be extended as much as possible.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.368-374
• /
• 2018

In this case, the patient was restored with gold Hader bar mandibular implant overdenture using two implants about 10 years ago, and the retentive force was lost due to severe wear of the bar due to 3.5 years use. The overdenture was repaired using a Locator attachment, but the male part was completely worn after 6.5 years use. Finally, we used a hybrid telescopic double crown with a friction pin to fabricate a new implant overdenture, which was observed for 2 years and showed excellent prognosis. So, we describe the cause of failure of each attachment (Gold Hader bar, Locator) in two implant overdentures and report on the advantages and disadvantages of double crown implant overdenture and the conditions for success.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.55-62
• /
• 2017

Overdenture using dental implants could improve the problems of conventional complete denture function which are pain during mastication, insufficient retention and stability. Locator attachment used widely for implant-retained overdenture has advantages that it needs the smallest vertical space and also its nylon male cap allows personalized retention for each case. However its retention force decreases rapidly with function rather than the bar and ball attachment. So, implant fixture should be positioned as parallel as possible.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.116-120
• /
• 2012

Various options have been introduced for the selection of implant overdenture attachments. Attachment wear due to the repeated insertion and removal of dentures has caused problems such as decreased retention and the requirement for suprastructure remanufacturing. In these cases, a Locator bar system was applied using the drill and tapping technique to achieve total retrievability. In a 55-year-old female patient who showed three degrees of mobility in most of her teeth due to severe alveolar bone loss, a complete denture in the maxilla and an implant supported type overdenture in the mandible were planned after extracting all the remaining teeth. Six implants were placed from canine region to the distal molar region, and the locator was connected to the milled bar using the drill and tapping technique. For a 61-year-old female edentulous patient who complained of poor retention with old denture, a complete denture in the maxilla and an implant-tissue supported type overdenture in the mandible were planned. Four implants were placed in front of mental foramen, and the Locator was also connected to the Hader bar using the drill and tapping technique. With this technique, female parts can be easily replaced, and retention can be continuously maintained.