Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Circumferential bone level and bone remodeling in the posterior mandible of edentulous mandibular overdenture wearers: influence of mandibular bone atrophy in a 3-year cohort study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Evaluate circumferential bone level and morphological alterations in the posterior mandibular ridge of atrophic (AP) and non-atrophic (NAP) patients using implant-retained mandibular overdentures (MO) over 3 years.

Materials and methods

Twenty-six edentulous patients categorized according to mandibular atrophy (AP = 13/NAP = 13) received two narrow diameter implants (Facility, 2.9 × 10 mm) in the anterior region of mandible. The vertical and horizontal bone level was measured along with bone remodeling at 4 distances from the mental foramen in the posterior region of the mandible (L1–L4) via CBCT.

Results

NAP showed significantly higher total height and medullary height in all posterior regions at 1 and 3 years (p ≤ 0.01). Cortical height and width were significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) in this group at distances L1 and L4, respectively, in year 1. NAP shows a significantly higher % of medullary height at distances L1 (p ≤ 0.05), L2 (p ≤ 0.01), and L3 (p ≤ 0.05) after 1 year, and at all distances (p ≤ 0.05) after 3 years. Bone remodeling in the groups differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05) in terms of cortical width and % medullary width at L3.

Conclusion

AP and NAP showed similar vertical and horizontal bone level. Bone resorption in the posterior ridge was stabilized by MO over 3 years; however, AP are more susceptible to the long-term substitution of medullary bone by cortical bone.

Clinical relevance

This study is the first to longitudinally evaluate bone dimensions in atrophic and non-atrophic two-implant MO users by CBCT and revealed that MO is a predictable treatment based on the stabilization of the posterior bone resorption.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Enkling N, Saftig M, Worni A et al (2017) Chewing efficiency, bite force and oral health-related quality of life with narrow diameter implants - a prospective clinical study: results after one year. Clin Oral Implants Res 28:476–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Reissmann DR, Enkling N, Moazzin R et al (2018) Long-term changes in oral health-related quality of life over a period of 5 years in patients treated with narrow diameter implants: a prospective clinical study. J Dent 75:84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schuster A, Pastorino D, Marcello-Machado R, Faot F (2019) Influence of age and time since edentulism on masticatory function and quality of life in implant-retained mandibular overdenture wearers: 1-year results from a paired clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34:1466–1474. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Matthys C, Vervaeke S, Jacquet W, De Bruyn H (2018) Impact of crestal bone resorption on quality of life and professional maintenance with conventional dentures or Locator-retained mandibular implant overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 120:886–894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.11.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Marcello-Machado RM, Faot F, Schuster AJ et al (2018) How fast can treatment with overdentures improve the masticatory function and OHRQoL of atrophic edentulous patients? A 1-year longitudinal clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 29:215–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. da Rosa Possebon AP, Schuster AJ, Bielemann AM et al (2020) Evaluation of bite force and masticatory performance: complete denture vs mandibular overdenture users. Braz Dent J 31:399–403. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440202003525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. da Rosa Possebon AP, Schuster AJ, de Miranda SB et al (2020) Do implant-retained mandibular overdentures maintain radiographic, functional, and patient-centered outcomes after 3 years of loading? Clin Oral Implants Res 31:936–945. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mahanna F, Elsyad M, Mourad S, Abozaed H (2020) Satisfaction and oral health–related quality of life of different attachments used for implant-retained overdentures in subjects with resorbed mandibles: a crossover trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 35:423–431. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wright PS, Glantz PO, Randow K, Watson RM (2002) The effects of fixed and removable implant-stabilised prostheses on posterior mandibular residual ridge resorption. Clin Oral Implants Res 13:169–174. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130207.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marcello-Machado RM, Faot F, Schuster AJ et al (2018) One-year clinical outcomes of locking taper Equator attachments retaining mandibular overdentures to narrow diameter implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 20:483–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12605

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Marcello-Machado RM, Faot F, Schuster AJ et al (2020) Mapping of inflammatory biomarkers in the peri-implant crevicular fluid before and after the occlusal loading of narrow diameter implants. Clin Oral Investig 24:1311–1320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03010-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schuster AJ, Marcello-Machado RM, Bielemann AM et al (2020) Immediate vs conventional loading of Facility-Equator system in mandibular overdenture wearers: 1-year RCT with clinical, biological, and functional evaluation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 22:270–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Doornewaard R, Glibert M, Matthys C et al (2019) Improvement of quality of life with implant-supported mandibular overdentures and the effect of implant type and surgical procedure on bone and soft tissue stability: a three-year prospective split-mouth trial. J Clin Med 8:773. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8060773

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Matthys C, Vervaeke S, Besseler J et al (2019) Five years follow-up of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on locator or ball abutments: implant results, patient-related outcome, and prosthetic aftercare. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 21:835–844. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bilhan H, Geckili O, Mumcu E et al (2012) The influence of implant number and attachment type on maximum bite force of mandibular overdentures: a retrospective study. Gerodontology 29:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2010.00421.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mumcu E, Dereci Ö (2019) Assessment of the effect of clinical independent risk factors on marginal bone loss in 2-implant–supported locator-retained mandibular overdentures. J Oral Implantol 45:207–212. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-18-00193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. TercanliAlkis H, Turker N (2019) Retrospective evaluation of marginal bone loss around implants in a mandibular locator-retained denture using panoramic radiographic images and finite element analysis: a pilot study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 21:1199–1205. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Elsyad MA, Khirallah AS (2016) Circumferential bone loss around splinted and nonsplinted immediately loaded implants retaining mandibular overdentures: a randomized controlled clinical trial using cone beam computed tomography. J Prosthet Dent 116:741–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ritter L, Elger MC, Rothamel D et al (2014) Accuracy of peri-implant bone evaluation using cone beam CT, digital intra-oral radiographs and histology. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 43:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cho H-J, Jeon J-Y, Ahn S-J et al (2019) The preliminary study for three-dimensional alveolar bone morphologic characteristics for alveolar bone restoration. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 41:2–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-019-0216-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fanuscu MI, Chang T-L (2004) Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of human cadaver bone: microstructural data from maxilla and mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res 15:213–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00969.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Dessel J, Nicolielo LFP, Huang Y et al (2016) Quantification of bone quality using different cone beam computed tomography devices: accuracy assessment for edentulous human mandibles. Eur J Oral Implantol 9:411–424

    Google Scholar 

  23. Nicolielo LFP, Van Dessel J, van Lenthe GH et al (2018) Computer-based automatic classification of trabecular bone pattern can assist radiographic bone quality assessment at dental implant site. Br J Radiol 91:20180437. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180437

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Simons WF, De Smit M, Duyck J et al (2015) The proportion of cancellous bone as predictive factor for early marginal bone loss around implants in the posterior part of the mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res 26:1051–1059. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Raes F, Renckens L, Aps J et al (2013) Reliability of circumferential bone level assessment around single implants in healed ridges and extraction sockets using cone beam CT. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 15:661–672. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00393.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Khalifa AK, Wada M, Ikebe K, Maeda Y (2016) To what extent residual alveolar ridge can be preserved by implant? A systematic review. Int J Implant Dent 2.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-016-0057-z

  27. Mosnegutu A, Wismeijer D, Geraets W (2015) Implant-supported mandibular overdentures can minimize mandibular bone resorption in edentulous patients: results of a long-term radiologic evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30:1378–1386. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kremer U, Schindler S, Enkling N et al (2016) Bone resorption in different parts of the mandible in patients restored with an implant overdenture. A retrospective radiographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 27:267–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bastuji-Garin S, Sbidian E, Gaudy-Marqueste C et al (2013) Impact of STROBE statement publication on quality of observational study reporting: interrupted time series versus before-after analysis. PLoS ONE 8:e64733. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064733

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Marcello-Machado RM, Faot F, Schuster AJ et al (2017) How does mandibular bone atrophy influence the masticatory function, OHRQoL and satisfaction in overdenture wearers? Clinical results until 1-year post-loading. J Oral Rehabil 44:850–859. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schuster AJ, da Rosa Possebon AP, Marcello-Machado RM et al (2020) Masticatory function and oral health-related quality of life of patients with atrophic and non-atrophic mandibles using implant-retained mandibular overdentures: 3-year results of a prospective clinical study. J Oral Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cawood JI, Howell RA (1988) A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 17:232–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(88)80047-X

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Marcello-Machado RM, Bielemann AM, Nascimento GG et al (2017) Masticatory function parameters in patients with varying degree of mandibular bone resorption. J Prosthodont Res 61:315–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.12.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR (1986) The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1:11–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Betts NJ, Barber HD, Powers MP et al (1993) Osseous changes following placement of the transmandibular implant system in edentulous mandibles. Implant Dent 2:11–18. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199304000-00004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Springe B, Slaidina A, Soboleva U, Lejnieks A (2014) Bone mineral density and mandibular residual ridge resorption. Int J Prosthodont 27:270–276. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ozola B, Slaidina A, Laurina L et al (2011) The influence of bone mineral density and body mass index on resorption of edentulous jaws. Stomatologija 13:19–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Singhal S, Chand P, Singh BP et al (2012) The effect of osteoporosis on residual ridge resorption and masticatory performance in denture wearers. Gerodontology 29:1059–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2011.00610.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Bianchi A, Sanfilippo F (2002) Osteoporosis: the effect on mandibular bone resorption and therapeutic possibilities by means of implant prostheses. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 22:231–239

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Amorim MAL, Takayama L, Jorgetti V, Pereira RMR (2007) Comparative study of axial and femoral bone mineral density and parameters of mandibular bone quality in patients receiving dental implants. Osteoporos Int 18:703–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0295-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramos AL, EL Pedro R, De Carli JP et al (2017) Influence of age on factors associated with peri-implant bone loss after prosthetic rehabilitation over osseointegrated implants. J Contemp Dent Pract 18:3–10. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zmysłowska E, Ledzion S, Jedrzejewski K (2007) Factors affecting mandibular residual ridge resorption in edentulous patients: a preliminary report. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 66:346–352

    Google Scholar 

  43. Al AH, AlZain S, Warsy A et al (2019) Mandibular residual ridge height in relation to age, gender and duration of edentulism in a Saudi population: a clinical and radiographic study. Saudi Dent J 31:258–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank to Neodent for supplying the dental implants used in the study.

Funding

The work was supported by the Junior Postdoctoral Scholarship – funded by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq (157253/2018–0 process, Postdoctoral researcher A.J. Schuster).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernanda Faot.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The investigation was approved by Research Ethics Committee of the School of Dentistry- UFPel (nº 69/2013, report 3.725.829).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schuster, A.J., da Rosa Possebon, A.P., Schinestsck, A.R. et al. Circumferential bone level and bone remodeling in the posterior mandible of edentulous mandibular overdenture wearers: influence of mandibular bone atrophy in a 3-year cohort study. Clin Oral Invest 26, 3119–3130 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-04294-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-04294-9

Keywords

Navigation