Journal of Dental Implants
   About JDI | Editorial | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Login 
Users Online: 4045  Wide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 10-15

Evaluation of two different attachment systems used with mandibular implant-retained overdenture

1 Department of Prosthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
2 Department of Restorative and Dental Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Taif, KSA

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mohamed Yousef Abdelfattah
Department of Prosthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Taif
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jdi.jdi_23_18

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two different attachment systems on the retention and implant stability of implant-retained mandibular overdenture. Materials and Methods: Fourteen completely edentulous patients with age ranged from 47 to 65 years planned to receive conventional complete denture. Following the treatment protocol, each patient received two implants in the mandibular anterior region, and after insurance of the osseointegration, the patients were randomly divided into two groups – Group A received Ball/O-Ring attachment and Group B received locator attachment. The retention of two groups was assessed by the digital force meter at three times (T): T0 – retention of conventional complete denture, T1 – at time of insertion of implant-retained mandibular overdenture, and T3 – retention after 3 months of insertion of implant-retained mandibular overdenture. The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was done using Magnetic Resonance Frequency Analyzer (Osstell, ISQ) at the time of loading then after 3 and 6 months. Results: The retention values before the insertion of overdenture (T0) were considerably low in comparison with those at time of insertion of overdenture (T1) and after 3 months from denture insertion (T3). Regarding the ISQ values, there was no significant difference between the two groups before and at the time of insertion of implant while there was a significant difference between the two groups with better stability results in the locator attachment group after 3 months (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, both types of attachment systems, i.e., Ball/O-Ring and locator attachments are reliable modalities for improving the retention and stability of implant-retained mandibular overdenture with superior initial stability results for the locator attachment.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded320    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal