Mandibular single denture opposed by maxillary natural dentition showed a great problem. However, mandibular implant overdenture treatment has gained considerable recognition. Ten male patients with complete mandibula...Mandibular single denture opposed by maxillary natural dentition showed a great problem. However, mandibular implant overdenture treatment has gained considerable recognition. Ten male patients with complete mandibular edentulous arch and opposing arch have full natural dentition. Patients were divided into two groups. All patients received two endosseous titanium implants. In Group I, patients were rehabilitated with conventional implant retained overdentures. While in Group II, Patients were rehabilitated with occlusal reactive implant overdentures. A Novel proposed biosensor was used to measure the amount of biting force on the implant retained overdenture. Quantitative electromyographic (EMG) signals of the masseter and anterior fibers of temporalis muscles were recorded, filtered and directly interfaced with a computer to represent the data graphically. The mean amplitude (μV), turn, and activity were recorded at the baseline and after three months. The results revealed an increase in the muscle activity in group II after three months as compared to group I. Significant difference in bilateral biting force at the premolar-molar area was found between group I and group II after three months. This study concluded that a resilient implant overdenture denture could be a desirable treatment in mandibular overdenture supported by two implants with resilient attachment and opposing natural dentition due to its easy fabrication and durability in use and increased muscle activity.展开更多
Purpose: The aim of the present study was to use finite elemental analysis (FEA) to evaluate bone stress near an implant placed at the border between the mandible and fibular graft in mandibular reconstruction. Materi...Purpose: The aim of the present study was to use finite elemental analysis (FEA) to evaluate bone stress near an implant placed at the border between the mandible and fibular graft in mandibular reconstruction. Materials and Methods: A fibular model (FM) and transplantation model (TM) were constructed for FEA. In TM, mandible was on the mesial side and the fibular graft was on the distal side. The implant was positioned at the center of both bone models. In TM, it was placed on the border between the mandible and fibular graft. A 10-mm implant was used in the monocortical model and a 15-mm implant was used in the bicortical model. The loading force was set at 100 N, the angle was set at 90°, and the loading position was set as center, mesial, or distal on the upper surface of the prosthesis. Von Mises equivalent stress values of the bone near the implant collar and apex at the middle line between buccal and lingual side were measured. Results: In all models, stress values were significantly lower with center loading than with distal loading and mesial loading. In center loading, the stress values were significantly lower in the bicortical model than in the monocortical model. There were no significant differences in stress values between FM and TM in all conditions. Conclusions: Bone stress was least with the center loading position, which was further decreased by bicortical fixation. There was no increase in mechanical stress associated with placing an implant at the border between the mandible and the fibular graft.展开更多
Background: Resection of the mandible can lead to bony defect which has a direct bearing on the quality of life of the patient. Reconstruction of such defect is necessary to restore aesthetics but optimal functioning ...Background: Resection of the mandible can lead to bony defect which has a direct bearing on the quality of life of the patient. Reconstruction of such defect is necessary to restore aesthetics but optimal functioning of the oral cavity can only be achieved with prosthodontic rehabilitation. We, hereby, report the impact of oral rehabilitation on patients’ satisfaction and quality of life after mandibular reconstruction in our institution. Materials and Method: Patients who had oral rehabilitation following mandibular reconstruction from January 2010 to December 2015 were included. Patients’ oral health related quality of life [OHRQL] before and after rehabilitation was evaluated using the head and neck module of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC]. Oral functions and denture satisfaction were also evaluated with Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]. Data obtained were analyzed with SPSS version 20 and level of significance was set at p Result: Of the 43 patients who had mandibular reconstruction during the study period, only 21 [48.8%] had dental rehabilitation. Twelve patients [57.1%] had conventional acrylic denture, 5 had fixed denture [bridge] while 4 patients had rehabilitation with dental implants. The mean follow-up period after rehabilitation was 8.42 months [Range: 6 - 22 months]. Although, OHRQL analysis revealed an improvement following rehabilitation, only the social aspect of the evaluation was statistically significant [p p = 0.00]. On the contrary, there was no statistically significant difference in aesthetics amongst the patients regardless of type of rehabilitation [p = 0.26]. Conclusion: Findings from this study showed that there is improvement in OHRQL following dental rehabilitation. Also, Patients who were rehabilitated with dental implant had better oral function than those with fixed or conventional denture.展开更多
文摘Mandibular single denture opposed by maxillary natural dentition showed a great problem. However, mandibular implant overdenture treatment has gained considerable recognition. Ten male patients with complete mandibular edentulous arch and opposing arch have full natural dentition. Patients were divided into two groups. All patients received two endosseous titanium implants. In Group I, patients were rehabilitated with conventional implant retained overdentures. While in Group II, Patients were rehabilitated with occlusal reactive implant overdentures. A Novel proposed biosensor was used to measure the amount of biting force on the implant retained overdenture. Quantitative electromyographic (EMG) signals of the masseter and anterior fibers of temporalis muscles were recorded, filtered and directly interfaced with a computer to represent the data graphically. The mean amplitude (μV), turn, and activity were recorded at the baseline and after three months. The results revealed an increase in the muscle activity in group II after three months as compared to group I. Significant difference in bilateral biting force at the premolar-molar area was found between group I and group II after three months. This study concluded that a resilient implant overdenture denture could be a desirable treatment in mandibular overdenture supported by two implants with resilient attachment and opposing natural dentition due to its easy fabrication and durability in use and increased muscle activity.
文摘Purpose: The aim of the present study was to use finite elemental analysis (FEA) to evaluate bone stress near an implant placed at the border between the mandible and fibular graft in mandibular reconstruction. Materials and Methods: A fibular model (FM) and transplantation model (TM) were constructed for FEA. In TM, mandible was on the mesial side and the fibular graft was on the distal side. The implant was positioned at the center of both bone models. In TM, it was placed on the border between the mandible and fibular graft. A 10-mm implant was used in the monocortical model and a 15-mm implant was used in the bicortical model. The loading force was set at 100 N, the angle was set at 90°, and the loading position was set as center, mesial, or distal on the upper surface of the prosthesis. Von Mises equivalent stress values of the bone near the implant collar and apex at the middle line between buccal and lingual side were measured. Results: In all models, stress values were significantly lower with center loading than with distal loading and mesial loading. In center loading, the stress values were significantly lower in the bicortical model than in the monocortical model. There were no significant differences in stress values between FM and TM in all conditions. Conclusions: Bone stress was least with the center loading position, which was further decreased by bicortical fixation. There was no increase in mechanical stress associated with placing an implant at the border between the mandible and the fibular graft.
文摘目的:对下颌第一磨牙拔除后行种植修复的病例进行回顾性研究,探索重度牙周破坏(advanced periodontal defect,APD)对拔牙后种植手术方式的影响。方法:纳入下颌第一磨牙拔除后自然愈合3~12个月行种植手术的患者176例,共179个种植位点,进行回顾性分析,记录患者年龄、性别、缺牙时间以及拔牙时是否有APD。采用多因素Logistic回归,分析拔牙前APD是否是种植时行引导性骨再生(guided bone regeneration,GBR)的风险因素。结果:对年龄、性别、缺牙时间等因素校正后,结果显示,有APD的下颌第一磨牙,种植时行GBR的风险是无APD位点的4.738倍(95%可信区间:1.650~13.609,P<0.05)。结论:APD的下颌第一磨牙拔除后,种植手术时行GBR的可能性更大。
文摘Background: Resection of the mandible can lead to bony defect which has a direct bearing on the quality of life of the patient. Reconstruction of such defect is necessary to restore aesthetics but optimal functioning of the oral cavity can only be achieved with prosthodontic rehabilitation. We, hereby, report the impact of oral rehabilitation on patients’ satisfaction and quality of life after mandibular reconstruction in our institution. Materials and Method: Patients who had oral rehabilitation following mandibular reconstruction from January 2010 to December 2015 were included. Patients’ oral health related quality of life [OHRQL] before and after rehabilitation was evaluated using the head and neck module of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC]. Oral functions and denture satisfaction were also evaluated with Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]. Data obtained were analyzed with SPSS version 20 and level of significance was set at p Result: Of the 43 patients who had mandibular reconstruction during the study period, only 21 [48.8%] had dental rehabilitation. Twelve patients [57.1%] had conventional acrylic denture, 5 had fixed denture [bridge] while 4 patients had rehabilitation with dental implants. The mean follow-up period after rehabilitation was 8.42 months [Range: 6 - 22 months]. Although, OHRQL analysis revealed an improvement following rehabilitation, only the social aspect of the evaluation was statistically significant [p p = 0.00]. On the contrary, there was no statistically significant difference in aesthetics amongst the patients regardless of type of rehabilitation [p = 0.26]. Conclusion: Findings from this study showed that there is improvement in OHRQL following dental rehabilitation. Also, Patients who were rehabilitated with dental implant had better oral function than those with fixed or conventional denture.
