• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.60 no.1
• /
• pp.29-36
• /
• 2022

When planning oral rehabilitation for maxillary edentulous patients, fixed prosthetic restoration using implants, complete denture restoration or overdentures using implants can be considered as treatment methods. In the case of complete denture restoration, it does not require additional surgery and is relatively economical. In the case of implant-supported fixed prostheses, the functional part is generally superior to that of complete denture restoration, but there are cases in which implant placement is clinically difficult. Recently in consideration of the patient's needs and the condition of the remaining alveolar bone, after partial implant placement, a method of restoring with a removable partial denture using implant-supported surveyed crown is also being attempted. This case is a case of performing a removable partial denture restoration using implant-supported surveyed crown in the anterior maxilla, and showing satisfactory esthetic and functional results.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.60 no.4
• /
• pp.442-452
• /
• 2022

Implant-assisted removable partial denture (IAPRD) can be considered as a simple and cost-effective treatment approach for an edentulous patient with anatomical or financial limitations. Recently, it was reported that the application of IARPD with implant supported fixed prostheses covered by the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) were increasing. This case report describes the treatment of maxillary fully edentulous patient with anterior four-implant-supported fixed prosthesis and distal extension IARPD. This treatment approach may be advantageous over maxillary implant overdentures in some circumstances. The patient was satisfied with improved function and esthetics in the anterior area and financial benefit from the NHIS. Further long-term clinical studies are needed to establish clinical validity of the treatment approach described in this case report.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.60 no.4
• /
• pp.339-346
• /
• 2022

Compared with traditional full dentures, mandibular implant overdentures have the advantage in that good support and retention can be obtained even with two implants. When manufacturing a mandibular implant overdenture using two implants, it is important to place the implant in the correct position. The long-term prognosis of overdenture is good when two implants are placed in the direction vertical to the occlusal plane and parallel to each other at the canine position. However, it is difficult to place two implants in the correct position in edentulous patients, and if you use surgical guides in these cases, you can get help in placing the implants in a prosthetically advantageous position. This case, a 57-year-old male patient, came to our hospital with all upper and lower teeth removed due to periodontal disease. Therefore, the maxilla was restored with a traditional full denture and the mandible was restored with an implant overdenture using two implants, which resulted in satisfactory functional and esthetic results.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.62 no.2
• /
• pp.131-139
• /
• 2024

In a edentulous patient, various methods can be employed for prosthetic treatment using implants, such as implant-supported fixed prostheses, overdentures, hybrid prostheses, and implant assisted removable partial denture. In this case, in a patient with moderate to severe chronic periodontitis requiring full arch extractions, implants were strategically placed using computer-guided surgery. In the maxilla, due to inadequate bone quality and quantity leading to insufficient initial stability, delayed loading was implemented, and interim prosthesis was used during the osseointegration period. In the mandible, stable initial stability was achieved, allowing for immediate loading to reduce patient discomfort. Primary stability is considered the most crucial factor for obtaining immediate loading, so a thorough clinical and radiological evaluation of the remaining alveolar bone quantity and quality must be conducted before surgery.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.359-371
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the stress distribution in mandibular implant overdentures with telescopic crowns compared to bar attachment. Material and methods: Three-dimensional finite element models consisting of the mandibular bone, 4 implants, and primary bar-splinted superstructure or secondary splinted superstructure with telescopic crowns were created. Vertical and oblique loads were directed onto the occlusal areas of the superstructures to simulate the maximal intercuspal contacts and working contacts such as group function occlusion. Maximum stress and stress distribution were analysed in mandibular bone, implant abutments, and superstructures. Results: 1. In comparison of von Mises stress on mandibular bone, telescopic overdenture had a little lower stress values in vertical load and working side load except oblique load. In the mandible, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress than the bar overdenture. 2. In comparison of von Mises stress on implant abutments, telescopic overdenture had much lower stress values in all load conditions. In implant abutments, the telescopic overdenture distributed stress similar to the bar overdenture. Stress was concentrated on the distal surfaces of the posterior implant abutments in both mandibular overdentures. 3. In comparison of von Mises stress on superstructures, the telescopic overdenture had much more stress values in all load conditions. However, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress on superstructure than the bar overdenture. In the bar overdenture, stress was concentrated on each cental area of bar structures and connected area between implant abutments and bar structures. Conclusion: In the results of this study, the telescopic overdenture had lower stress values than the bar overdenture in mandibular bone and implant abutments, but more stress values in superstructures. However, if optimal material was selected in making superstructures, the telescopic overdenture was compared to the bar overdenture in stress distribution.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.331-337
• /
• 2014

In conventional bar- and clip-retained overdentures, all errors during impression making and cast fabrication result in non-passive fit of bars. SFI bar is prefabricated and assembled in the patient's mouth without the use of soldering, laser welding or conventional bonding techniques, thus reducing stress transmission to, bone loss around the implants and leading to fewer errors and lower costs. A clinical case will be presented below to demonstrate the use of the SFI Bar (Stress Free on Implant Bar) to restore an severe atrophy edentulous maxilla. In this case, no lateral stress could be applied to the implants due to the telescopic design of the bar joints. However, periodic recall check is necessary and long-term clinical results are required.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.1
• /
• pp.58-65
• /
• 2015

For the rehabilitation of fully edentulous patients, implant-supported removable partial dentures can be considered as one of the treatment options with complete dentures or implant-supported overdentures. If removable partial dentures are used in combination with a small number of implants placed in strategically important positions, it can offer additional stability, retention and support through implants and reduce a burden of surgical procedures compared with fixed implant-supported prostheses with extensive implant placement. Moreover, the economical benefit can be expected as well. The purpose of this case report is to present a treatment in which an implant-supported removable partial denture was fabricated considering residual alveolar bone status and demands after teeth loss in a patient who had been using a distal extension removable partial denture for a long period of time. In anterior area, fixed prostheses were fabricated with implant placement and in posterior area, short implants provide only support for the removable partial denture. In addition, denture base and clasp were made of thermoplastic acrylic resin. Finally, functionally and aesthetically satisfying treatment results can be achieved.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.40 no.5
• /
• pp.507-524
• /
• 2002

Load transfer of implant overdenture varies depending on anchorage systems that are the design of the superstructure and substructure and the choice of attachment. Overload by using improper anchorage system not only will cause fracture of the framework or screw but also may cause failure of osseointegration. Choosing anchorage system in making prosthesis, therefore, can be considered to be one of the most important factors that affect long-term success of implant treatment. In this study, in order to determine the effect of anchorage systems on load transfer in mandibular implant overdenture in which 4 implants were placed in the interforaminal region, patterns of stress distribution in implant supporting bone in case of unilateral vertical loading on mandibular left first molar were compared each other according to various types of anchorage system using three-dimensional photoelastic stress analysis. The five photoelastic overdenture models utilizing Hader bar without cantilever using clips(type 1), cantilevered Hader bar using clips(type 2), cantilevered Hader bar with milled surface using clips(type 3), cantilevered milled-bar using swivel-latchs and frictional pins(type 4), and Hader bar using clip and ERA attachments(type 5), and one cantilevered fixed-detachable prosthesis(type 6) model as control were fabricated. The following conclusions were drawn within the limitations of this study, 1. In all experimental models. the highest stress was concentrated on the most distal implant supporting bone on loaded side. 2. Maximum fringe orders on ipsilateral distal implant supporting bone in a ascending order is as follows: type 5, type 1, type 4, type 2 and type 3, and type 6. 3. Regardless of anchorage systems. more or less stresses were generated on the residual ridge under distal extension base of all overdenture models. To summarize the above mentioned results, in case of the patients with unfavorable biomechanical conditions such as not sufficient number of supporting implants, short length of the implant and unfavorable antero-posterior spread. selecting resilient type attachment or minimizing distal cantilever bar is considered to be appropriate methods to prevent overloading on implants by reducing cantilever effect and gaining more support from the distal residual ridge.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.375-383
• /
• 2018

Clinicians are faced with many difficulties when planning prosthodontic restorations with implants in a complete edentulous patient. When planning fixed implant prosthetics, it is often necessary to have additional surgery due to highly reduced alveolar bone, as well as high treatment costs and long-term treatment durations can be required. In addition, lack of interocclusal space can be a problem when planning implant supported overdentures. In this study, we planned to place a small number of implants on the anterior maxilla and used them as the abutments for distal-extension removable partial dentures on the posterior side in a maxillary fully edentulous patient. This would reduce the possibility of additional invasive operations such as alveolar bone graft, shorten the treatment time, and be relatively easy for elderly patients to burden. In this case, the patient was provided with a distal-extension removable partial denture and anterior implant fixed prostheses, which was similar to the previous one, and showed good adaptation, and chewing efficiency and esthetics was recovered.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.9 no.5
• /
• pp.371-380
• /
• 2017

PURPOSE. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the stress distribution in Locator attachments in mandibular two-implant overdentures according to implant locations and different loading conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Four three-dimensional finite element models were created, simulating two osseointegrated implants in the mandible to support two Locator attachments and an overdenture. The models simulated an overdenture with implants located in the position of the level of lateral incisors, canines, second premolars, and crossed implant. A 150 N vertical unilateral and bilateral load was applied at different locations and 40 N was also applied when combined with anterior load at the midline. Data for von Mises stresses in the abutment (matrix) of the attachment and the plastic insert (patrix) of the attachment were produced numerically, color-coded, and compared between the models for attachments and loading conditions. RESULTS. Regardless of the load, the greatest stress values were recorded in the overdenture attachments with implants at lateral incisor locations. In all models and load conditions, the attachment abutment (matrix) withstood a much greater stress than the insert plastic (patrix). Regardless of the model, when a unilateral load was applied, the load side Locator attachments recorded a much higher stress compared to the contralateral side. However, with load bilateral posterior alone or combined at midline load, the stress distribution was more symmetrical. The stress is distributed primarily in the occlusal and lateral surface of the insert plastic patrix and threadless area of the abutment (matrix). CONCLUSION. The overdenture model with lateral incisor level implants is the worst design in terms of biomechanical environment for the attachment components. The bilateral load in general favors a more uniform stress distribution in both attachments compared to a much greater stress registered with unilateral load in the load side attachments. Regardless of the implant positions and the occlusal load application site, the stress transferred to the insert plastic is much lower than that registered in the abutment.