Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prosthetic Options: Fixed and Removable Overdentures

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Mandibular Implant Prostheses

Abstract

Many individuals are exposed to worse oral and general health when they transition from dentate to edentate status. In fact, edentulism is associated with high levels of physical and psychological disability, which are only partially reduced with the use of conventional prostheses as replacement for the missing natural teeth. The implant-assisted overdenture has thus become a viable option to replace denture because of the accumulating evidence on its advantages from both clinical and patient perspectives.

Various types of implant-assisted prostheses are available to treat partially or completely edentate patients. The functional capacity, time needed to treat, maintenance, complications and cost vary amongst the different types of implant prostheses and may address patients’ physical, psychological and social needs in different ways. To ensure the delivery of high-quality implant care within the available options, clinicians need to consult the literature and become aware of scientific evidence, exchange this knowledge with their patients and consider the level of their clinical expertise, as well as patients’ needs and preferences, to make a shared treatment decision and arrive at an agreement on the treatment to implement.

In this chapter, the authors distinguish between fixed and removable options for mandibular implant-assisted prostheses and provide a summary on different factors that should be considered in the choice between these two prosthetic designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Simon H, Yanase RT. Terminology for implant prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(4):539–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Emami E, Michaud PL, Sallaleh I, Feine JS. Implant-assisted complete prostheses. Periodontol. 2014;66(1):119–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. A review of clinical and technical considerations for fixed and removable implant prostheses in the edentulous mandible. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15(1):65–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wyatt CC. The effect of prosthodontic treatment on alveolar bone loss: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 1998;80(3):362–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carlsson GE. Responses of jawbone to pressure. Gerodontology. 2004;21(2):65–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Emami E, de Grandmont P, Rompre PH, Barbeau J, Pan S, Feine JS. Favoring trauma as an etiological factor in denture stomatitis. J Dent Res. 2008;87(5):440–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, Stegenga B, van't Hof MA, van Oort RP, Vissink A. Effectiveness of three treatment modalities for the edentulous mandible. A five-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(3):195–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pan S, Dagenais M, Thomason JM, Awad M, Emami E, Kimoto S, et al. Does mandibular edentulous bone height affect prosthetic treatment success? J Dent. 2010;38(11):899–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Awad MA, Lund JP, Dufresne E, Feine JS. Comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures and conventional dentures among middle-aged edentulous patients: satisfaction and functional assessment. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(2):117–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heydecke G, Locker D, Awad MA, Lund JP, Feine JS. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003;31(3):161–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Allen PF, McMillan AS. A longitudinal study of quality of life outcomes in older adults requesting implant prostheses and complete removable dentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14(2):173–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wismeijer D, Van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI, Mulder J, Kalk W. Patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures. A comparison of three treatment strategies with ITI-dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;26(4):263–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Boerrigter EM, Geertman ME, Van Oort RP, Bouma J, Raghoebar GM, van Waas MA, et al. Patient satisfaction with implant-retained mandibular overdentures. A comparison with new complete dentures not retained by implants—a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;33(5):282–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, van't Hof M, Stegenga B, Vissink A. A randomized prospective clinical trial on the effectiveness of three treatment modalities for patients with lower denture problems. A 10 year follow-up study on patient satisfaction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;32(5):498–503.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Watson RM, Jemt T, Chai J, Harnett J, Heath MR, Hutton JE, et al. Prosthodontic treatment, patient response, and the need for maintenance of complete implant-supported overdentures: an appraisal of 5 years of prospective study. Int J Prosthodont. 1997;10(4):345–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Emami E, Heydecke G, Rompre PH, de Grandmont P, Feine JS. Impact of implant support for mandibular dentures on satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(6):533–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM. Patient satisfaction with two designs of implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(11):1293–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bouma J, Boerrigter LM, Van Oort RP, van Sonderen E, Boering G. Psychosocial effects of implant-retained overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;12(4):515–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Van 't Hof MA, Visser A, Geertman ME, Van Oort RP. A controlled clinical trial of implant-retained mandibular overdentures; five-years’ results of clinical aspects and aftercare of IMZ implants and Branemark implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(5):441–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. de Albuquerque Junior RF, Lund JP, Tang L, Larivee J, de Grandmont P, Gauthier G, et al. Within-subject comparison of maxillary long-bar implant-retained prostheses with and without palatal coverage: patient-based outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(6):555–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kodama N, Singh BP, Cerutti-Kopplin D, Feine J, Emami E. Efficacy of mandibular 2-implant overdenture: an updated meta-analysis on patient-based outcomes. Clin Trans Res. 2016;01(01):20–30.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Palmqvist S, Soderfeldt B, Arnbjerg D. Subjective need for implant dentistry in a Swedish population aged 45-69 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1991;2(3):99–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Choosing or refusing oral implants: a prospective study of edentulous volunteers for a clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(6):483–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Walton JN, Glick N, Macentee MI. A randomized clinical trial comparing patient satisfaction and prosthetic outcomes with mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. Int J Prosthodont. 2009;22(4):331–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 3rd ed. St. Louis, MI: Mosby-Elsevier; 2008. 1102 p.

    Google Scholar 

  26. DeBoer J. Edentulous implants: overdenture versus fixed. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;69(4):386–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. de Grandmont P, Feine JS, Tache R, Boudrias P, Donohue WB, Tanguay R, et al. Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: psychometric evaluation. J Dent Res. 1994;73(5):1096–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Feine JS, de Grandmont P, Boudrias P, Brien N, LaMarche C, Tache R, et al. Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: choice of prosthesis. J Dent Res. 1994;73(5):1105–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. Treatment outcomes of fixed or removable implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part I: patients’ assessments. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(4):424–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. Treatment plan for restoring the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported restorations: removable overdenture versus fixed partial denture design. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;82(2):188–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Heydecke G, Boudrias P, Awad MA, De Albuquerque RF, Lund JP, Feine JS. Within-subject comparisons of maxillary fixed and removable implant prostheses: patient satisfaction and choice of prosthesis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14(1):125–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brennan M, Houston F, O'Sullivan M, O'Connell B. Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life outcomes of implant overdentures and fixed complete dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25(4):791–800.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Misch CE. In: Rudolph P, editor. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis, MI: Mosby-Elsevier; 2005. 626 p.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mericske-Stern RD, Taylor TD, Belser U. Management of the edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(Suppl 1):108–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mertens C, Steveling HG. Implant-supported fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla: 8-year prospective results. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(5):464–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Drago C, Carpentieri J. Treatment of maxillary jaws with dental implants: guidelines for treatment. J Prosthodont. 2011;20(5):336–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Michaud PL, Patel A. Hereditary gingival fibromatosis with extreme ridge thickness and insufficient interarch distance: a clinical report of surgical and prosthetic management. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(1):15–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Trakas T, Michalakis K, Kang K, Hirayama H. Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2006;15(1):24–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Quirynen M, Alsaadi G, Pauwels M, Haffajee A, van Steenberghe D, Naert I. Microbiological and clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction for two treatment options in the edentulous lower jaw after 10 years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16(3):277–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cehreli MC, Karasoy D, Kokat AM, Akca K, Eckert S. A systematic review of marginal bone loss around implants retaining or supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25(2):266–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. SH O, Kim Y, Park JY, Jung YJ, Kim SK, Park SY. Comparison of fixed implant-supported prostheses, removable implant-supported prostheses, and complete dentures: patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(2):e31–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bryant SR, MacDonald-Jankowski D, Kim K. Does the type of implant prosthesis affect outcomes for the completely edentulous arch? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(Suppl):117–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Vercruyssen M, Marcelis K, Coucke W, Naert I, Quirynen M. Long-term, retrospective evaluation (implant and patient-centred outcome) of the two-implants-supported overdenture in the mandible. Part 1: survival rate. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(4):357–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RH, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(7):722–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Jemt T, Chai J, Harnett J, Heath MR, Hutton JE, Johns RB, et al. A 5-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11(3):291–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Naert I, Maffei G, Jacobs R. Marginal bone loss around implants retaining hinging mandibular overdentures, at 4-, 8- and 12-years follow-up. J Clin Periodontol. 2001;28(7):628–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Montes CC, Pereira FA, Thome G, Alves ED, Acedo RV, de Souza JR, et al. Failing factors associated with osseointegrated dental implant loss. Implant Dent. 2007;16(4):404–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wright PS, Glantz PO, Randow K, Watson RM. The effects of fixed and removable implant-stabilised prostheses on posterior mandibular residual ridge resorption. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13(2):169–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bressan E, Tomasi C, Stellini E, Sivolella S, Favero G, Berglundh T. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(7):814–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Davis DM, Packer ME, Watson RM. Maintenance requirements of implant-supported fixed prostheses opposed by implant-supported fixed prostheses, natural teeth, or complete dentures: a 5-year retrospective study. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(5):521–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Attard NJ, Zarb GA. Long-term treatment outcomes in edentulous patients with implant overdentures: the Toronto study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(4):425–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Davis DM, Rogers JO, Packer ME. The extent of maintenance required by implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a 3-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11(6):767–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Tinsley D, Watson CJ, Russell JL. A comparison of hydroxylapatite coated implant retained fixed and removable mandibular prostheses over 4 to 6 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12(2):159–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JY. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(2):121–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Naert IE, Hooghe M, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. The reliability of implant-retained hinging overdentures for the fully edentulous mandible. An up to 9-year longitudinal study. Clin Oral Investig. 1997;1(3):119–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Akoglu B, Ucankale M, Ozkan Y, Kulak-Ozkan Y. Five-year treatment outcomes with three brands of implants supporting mandibular overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(1):188–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Heydecke G, Penrod JR, Takanashi Y, Lund JP, Feine JS, Thomason JM. Cost-effectiveness of mandibular two-implant overdentures and conventional dentures in the edentulous elderly. J Dent Res. 2005;84(9):794–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP, Sendi P. A cost-effectiveness analysis of implant overdentures. J Dent Res. 2006;85(8):717–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Zitzmann NU, Sendi P, Marinello CP. An economic evaluation of implant treatment in edentulous patients-preliminary results. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(1):20–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Attard NJ, Zarb GA, Laporte A. Long-term treatment costs associated with implant-supported mandibular prostheses in edentulous patients. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(2):117–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Elham Emami D.D.S., M.Sc., Ph.D.

  2. Department of Dental Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Pierre-Luc Michaud D.M.D., M.Sc., F.R.C.D.(C)

Authors
  1. Elham Emami D.D.S., M.Sc., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pierre-Luc Michaud D.M.D., M.Sc., F.R.C.D.(C)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elham Emami D.D.S., M.Sc., Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada

    Elham Emami

  2. Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada

    Jocelyne Feine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Emami, E., Michaud, PL. (2018). Prosthetic Options: Fixed and Removable Overdentures. In: Emami, E., Feine, J. (eds) Mandibular Implant Prostheses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71181-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71181-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71179-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71181-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation