Frantz K, Funkenbusch P, Feng C, Tsigarida A, Chochlidakis K, Lo Russo L, Ercoli C. Effect of implant angulation and patrice on the retention of overdenture attachment systems: An in vitro study.
J Prosthodont 2024;
33:452-459. [PMID:
37212388 DOI:
10.1111/jopr.13717]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/23/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE
To test the retention of two different overdenture attachment matrices and straight abutments when implants are placed at 0-, 15-, and 30-degree diverging angulations as well as the retention of 15-degree-angled abutments to correct the overall angulation to 0-degrees.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Matching aluminum blocks were machined to incorporate two dental implants at 0-degree, 15-degree, and 30-degree relative angulations and overdenture attachments to simulate a two-implant overdenture. At 0-degree, 15-degree, and 30-degree implant angulation, straight abutments were studied. At 30-degree implant angulation, an additional group was compared utilizing 15-degree angulated abutments that corrected the overall implant angulation to 0-degrees. A custom-designed testing apparatus that allowed automated insertion and removal of the simulated overdenture was designed, with three independent testing stations, each consisting of one simulated arch and one simulated overdenture base. The baseline and residual retention forces after 30,000 dislodging cycles of the simulated overdenture were measured. One-way ANOVA was used to compare retention differences among different color patrices within the 0-, 15-, and 30-degree implant angulation groups followed by Tukey's multiple comparison test. Two sample t-tests were used to compare 0-degree versus 15-degree implant groups with straight abutments and 30-degree implant groups with straight abutments versus 30-degree implant groups with angulated abutments.
RESULTS
Regardless of implant angulation or abutment correction, the change in retention exhibited by the Novaloc system after testing was not statistically significant for all patrice types (p > 0.05); however, the change in retention exhibited by the Locator system was statistically significant for the tested group (p = 0.0272). In both the Novaloc and Locator systems, the baseline and final retention values provided by the different patrices were significantly different except for the white and green Novaloc patrices in the 15-degree divergent implant group which did not meet the specified level of significance (p = 0.0776).
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this study, implant angulations upto 15 degrees do not affect differential change in retention of Novaloc patrices. There is no difference between Novaloc white inserts (light retention value) and green inserts (strong retention values) when implants diverge upto 15 degrees. When Novaloc straight abutments were placed on implants diverging by 30 degrees, blue extra-strong retention inserts outperformed yellow medium retention inserts by maintaining a higher retention value after 30,000 cycles. When utilizing Novaloc 15-degree angulated abutments that correct the overall implant angulation to zero degrees, the red light retentive patrice provides steady retention. Finally, the Locator-green patrice system provides greater retention than the comparable Novaloc-blue patrice combination; however, it also loses more retention after 30,000 cycles.
Collapse