Effect of Two Different Types of denture Base Materials on the Supporting Structures of Mandibular Mini Implant Supported Over denture | ||
| Ain Shams Dental Journal | ||
| Article 14, Volume 21, Issue 1, March 2021, Pages 113-118 PDF (605.15 K) | ||
| Document Type: Consort randomized clinical trials (RCT) | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/asdj.2021.59640.1016 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ahmed Atef Elmahdy* 1; Hany Ibrahium Eid2; Shimaa Lotfy Ouda3 | ||
| 1Removable prosthodontics ,Faculty of dentistry, Ain shams university, Cairo , Egypt | ||
| 2Removable prosthodontics, Faculty of dentistry ,Ain shams University Cairo , Egypt | ||
| 3Removable prosthodontics, Faculty of dentistry, Ain shams University ,Cairo ,Egypt | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objectives:This research was carried out to evaluate radiographically the effect of different denture base materials “poly methyl methacrylate base (PMMA) processed by conventional technique versus thermoplastic biocompatible (polyan IC ) base processed by injectable mold technique on the supporting structures of the mini implant retained mandibular overdenture using CBCT. Materials and Methods: Fourteen edentulous patients with a mean age of 55 year were selected to participate in this study. Inclusion criteria were: U-shaped alveolar arches, Angle class I ridge relationship, adequate inter arch space. Exclusion criteria were: Patients having systemic diseases affecting bone metabolism, patients having parafunctional habits, patients suffering from neuromuscular disorders, and temporomandibular joint disorders. Un-controlled diabetes. For all the selected patients, mucosa supported maxillary complete denture and mini-implant retained mandibular over denture by four mini- implants installed in the interforaminal region. Patients participating in this study were randomly divided into two equal groups according to the denture base materials, Group 1:Seven patients were rehabilitated with upper conventional acrylic resin complete denture and lower mini-implant retained mandibular overdenture processed by the conventional technique Group 2:Seven patients were rehabilitated with upper conventional acrylic resin complete denture and lower mini-implant retained mandibular overdenture processed by injectable technique. Results: In this study, at the end of the follow up period there was statistically significant difference of peri-implants bone changes between group 1 (conventional technique) and group 2 ( injectable technique). The least bone loss was reported around the implants in group 2. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| KEY WORDS: Lower; overdenture; mini implant; injectable | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 179 PDF Download: 524 |
||
