Bacteriological Evaluation for One-and Two-piece Implant Design Supporting Mandibular Overdenture

Overview

Journal Niger Med J

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2016 Feb 24

PMID 26903697

Citations 1

Authors

Ahmed Abdelwahed

Ahmed I Mahrous

Mohamed Farouk Abadallah

Hani Asfour

Hussien A Aldawash

Ebaa I Alagha

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated and compared the bacteriological effect of two-piece implants and one-piece implants in complete overdenture cases on supporting structures.

Materials And Methods: Ten male completely edentulous patients were selected and randomly divided into two equal groups according to the implant design and surgical technique for this study; Group 1: Patients were rehabilitated with complete mandibular overdenture supported by two-piece implants one on each side of the lower arch following two-stage surgical technique and Group 2: Patients were rehabilitated with complete mandibular overdenture supported by one-piece implants one on each side. Evaluation was made at the time of insertion, 6, 12, and 18 months after overdenture insertion, by measuring bacteriological changes around implants abutments.

Results: Complete overdenture supported by one-piece implants showed better effect on the bacteriological changes as compared to that supported by two-piece implants.

Conclusion: Complete overdenture supported by one-piece implants one on each side of the lower arch showed better effect on the bacteriological changes than using the same prosthesis supported by two-piece implants.

Citing Articles

Radiographic and Clinical Evaluation of Implant Prosthetic Treatment with One Piece versus Two Piece Dental Implants: A Comparative Prospective Study.

Liji B, Padmasree S, Ajitha S, Ramya D, Ranukumari A, Shakila R J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2023; 15(Suppl 1):S481-S485.

PMID: 37654392 PMC: 10466507. DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_566_22.

References

Gristina A . Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science. 1987; 237(4822):1588-95. DOI: 10.1126/science.3629258. View

Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Ericsson I, Marinello C, Liljenberg B, Thomsen P . The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1991; 2(2):81-90. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1991.020206.x. View

Berglundh T, Lindhe J . Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol. 1996; 23(10):971-3. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1996.tb00520.x. View

Luterbacher S, Mayfield L, Bragger U, Lang N . Diagnostic characteristics of clinical and microbiological tests for monitoring periodontal and peri-implant mucosal tissue conditions during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001; 11(6):521-9. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011006521.x. View

Apse P, Ellen R, Overall C, Zarb G . Microbiota and crevicular fluid collagenase activity in the osseointegrated dental implant sulcus: a comparison of sites in edentulous and partially edentulous patients. J Periodontal Res. 1989; 24(2):96-105. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.1989.tb00863.x. View