PROSTHODONTIC REHABILITATION OF A PATIENT WITH IMPLANT RETAINED MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURE USING LOCATOR SYSTEM AND SEMI-PRECISION ATTACHMENT RETAINED MAXILLARY CAST PARTIAL DENTURE: A CASE REPORT

Main Article Content

Nikhil Vitthal Dayama
Mariyam Ali
Neeranshi Swaroop
Asra Ahmed
Dr. Samra Ashraf
Dr. Prerika Agrawal

Keywords

Implant Retained Mandibular Overdenture, Locator®, Extracoronal semi-precision attachment, Preci-Sagix, Cast partial dentures

Abstract

A traditional treatment approach that has had greater results is the use of attachment to provide retention for detachable prostheses. It significantly enhances patient comfort, aesthetics, functionality, and satisfaction, particularly in patients with long-term edentulism when implants and fixed partial dentures (FPD) are not recommended and cast partial dentures are barely acceptable. Many people regard an implant-retained complete lower denture as the industry benchmark for the oral rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible. It is a desirable therapeutic option due to its relative simplicity, minimal invasiveness, predictability, effectiveness, and cost. Magnets, studs, and bars are the most commonly used techniques for securing overdentures to implants. The Locator® system, a relatively new kind of stud attachment, was used to treat a patient in this case report. It discusses the use of an extracoronal semi-precision attachment to improve the retention of detachable prostheses and reconstruct the edentulous mandible and outlines a chairside method for retaining a full lower denture using the Locator® device.

Abstract 172 | pdf Downloads 129

References

1. Gupta S, Rani S, Sikri A, Kapoor A. Attachment retained cast partial denture: conventional and contemporary treatment perspectives. Int J Oral Care Res. 2016;4(4):312-6.
2. Master M, Shetty O, Charushila SS. Full mouth rehabilitation of a patient using cast partial dentures with precision attachments. Heal Talk 2013;5(5):26-28
3. Pandey B, Joshi SP, Thapa D, Shrestha P. Use of a semi-precision attachment to fabricate a removable partial denture: a case report. Journal of Nepalese Prosthodontic Society. 2019 Dec 31;2(2):108-12.
4. Gozneli R, Yildiz C, Vanlioglu B, Evren BA, Kulak-Ozkan Y. Retention behaviors of different attachment systems: Precious versus nonprecious, precision versus semi-precision. Dental materials journal. 2013 Sep 30;32(5):801-7.
5. Koshino H, Hirai T, Ishijima T, Ohtomo K. Influence of Mandibular Residual Ridge Shape on Masticatory Efficiency in Complete Denture Wearers. International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2002 May 1;15(3).
6. Witter DJ, Woda A, Bronkhorst EM, Creugers NH. Clinical interpretation of a masticatory normative indicator analysis of masticatory function in subjects with different occlusal and prosthodontic status. Journal of dentistry. 2013 May 1;41(5):443-8.
7. de Albuquerque Jr RF, Fromentin O, Lassauzay C, Conceição Pereira Saraiva MD. Patient satisfaction versus retention of implant overdentures with two attachment systems: A randomized trial. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2019 Feb;21(1):21-31.
8. Cardoso RG, Melo LA, Barbosa GA, Calderon PD, Germano AR, Mestriner Junior W, Carreiro AD. Impact of mandibular conventional denture and overdenture on quality of life and masticatory efficiency. Brazilian oral research. 2016 Oct 10;30.
9. Kuoppala R, Näpänkangas R, Raustia A. Quality of life of patients treated with implant-supported mandibular overdentures evaluated with the oral health impact profile (OHIP-14): A survey of 58 patients. Journal of oral & maxillofacial research. 2013 Jul 1;4(2):e4.
10. Martínez-Lage Azorín L, Segura Andrés G, Faus López J, Agustín Panadero R. Rehabilitation with implant-supported overdentures in total edentulous patients: a review.
11. Sivaramakrishnan G, Sridharan K. Comparison of implant supported mandibular overdentures and conventional dentures on quality of life: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled studies. Australian dental journal. 2016 Dec;61(4):482-8.
12. Schuster AJ, Marcello-Machado RM, Bielemann AM, Nascimento GG, Pinto LD, Del Bel Cury AA, Faot F. Short-term quality of life change perceived by patients after the transition to mandibular overdentures. Brazilian oral research. 2017 Mar 10;31.
13. Hedzelek W, Rzatowski S, Czarnecka B. Evaluation of the retentive characteristics of semi‐precision extracoronal attachments. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2011 Jun;38(6):462-8.
14. Saha S, Ray-Chaudhuri A. Mandibular implant-retained complete overdenture using retentive abutments: a case report. Dental update. 2009 Apr 2;36(3):154-8
15. Sadig W. A comparative in vitro study on the retention and stability of implant-supported overdentures. Quintessence International. 2009 Apr 1;40(4).
16. Cordaro L, di Torresanto VM, Petricevic N, Jornet PR, Torsello F. Single unit attachments improve peri‐implant soft tissue conditions in mandibular overdentures supported by four implants. Clinical oral implants research. 2013 May;24(5):536-42.
17. Cakarer S, Can T, Yaltirik M, Keskin C. Complications associated with the ball, bar and Locator attachments for implant-supported overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011;16:e953-9.
18. El-Sheikh AM, Shihabuddin OF, Ghoraba SM. Two versus three narrow-diameter implants with locator attachments supporting mandibular overdentures: Atwo-year prospective study. Int J Dent 2012;2012:285684.