Peri-implant mucosal response to implant-supported overdentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jagan Kumar Baskaradoss 1, Amrita Geevarghese 2, Mirza Rustum Baig 3

Affiliations

03 January 2021

-

doi: 10.1111/ger.12505

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically review and evaluate the effects of different types of attachments, implant numbers and loading protocols on the peri-implant mucosa of implant-supported overdentures (ISODs).

Background: The impact of peri-implant tissue health on the ISOD treatment outcome is unclear, and current evidence is inadequate on this aspect.

Materials and methods: A systematic literature search for randomised controlled trials or prospective studies was conducted in indexed databases from 1995 to April 2020. The focused question was as follows: How does the peri-implant mucosa respond to implant-supported or implant-tissue-supported complete overdentures based on different types of attachments, implant numbers, and loading protocols, in terms of clinical outcomes achieved [plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing pocket depth (PD) and bleeding index (BI)]? A random- or fixed-effects model was applied to measure the significance of standardised mean differences (SMD) of PD between the groups.

Results: Seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria. The SMD for PD between splinted/bar and unsplinted/stud attachments was 0.10 mm (95% CI: -0.27 to 0.47; P = .60) and between 2- and 4-implant groups was 0.15 mm (95% CI: -0.16 to 0.45; P = .34), which were not statistically significant. Significant difference (P = .003) was observed between immediate/early loading and delayed loading (SMD = 0.46 mm [95% CI: 0.16 to 0.75]).

Conclusions: Probing depth for the immediate loaded implants was significantly higher than for the delayed loading group. No attachment type, implant number or loading protocol seemed to have a clear advantage over the other, in terms of other peri-implant mucosal outcome measures.

Keywords: attachments; dental implants; implant loading; implant-supported dentures; oral mucosa; overdentures; peri-implant mucositis; peri-implantitis; periodontal indices.

Similar articles

Unsplinted Attachment Systems and Peri-implant Outcomes in Two-implant-retained Mandibular Overdentures: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Patil PG, Seow LL, Kweh TJ, Nimbalkar S.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021 Nov 1;22(11):1346-1354.PMID: 35343463 Review.

Effect of 2-implant mandibular overdenture with different attachments and loading protocols on peri-implant health and prosthetic complications: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Aldhohrah T, Mashrah MA, Wang Y.J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Jun;127(6):832-844. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.016. Epub 2021 Feb 3.PMID: 33546861 Review.

Stud vs Bar Attachments for Maxillary Four-Implant-Supported Overdentures: 3- to 9-year Results from a Retrospective Study.

Lian M, Zhao K, Wang F, Huang W, Zhang X, Wu Y.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 July/August;34(4):936–946. doi: 10.11607/jomi.7224. Epub 2019 Apr 1.PMID: 30934037

Early loading of unsplinted implants supporting mandibular overdentures using a one-stage operative procedure with two different implant systems: a 2-year report.

Tawse-Smith A, Payne AG, Kumara R, Thomson WM.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2002;4(1):33-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2002.tb00149.x.PMID: 11938636 Clinical Trial.

Long-term clinical and prosthetic outcomes of soft liner and clip attachments for bar/implant overdentures: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

ELsyad MA, Shaheen NH, Ashmawy TM.J Oral Rehabil. 2017 Jun;44(6):472-480. doi: 10.1111/joor.12500. Epub 2017 Mar 28.PMID: 28258636 Clinical Trial.

Cited by

Factors influencing retention and durability of attachments for overdentures - adverse effects of cleansings, pH, and temperature: A systematic review.

Campos MR, Marcondes Agnelli JA, Cândido Dos Reis A.Heliyon. 2022 Dec 17;8(12):e12411. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12411. eCollection 2022 Dec.PMID: 36582682 Free PMC article.

KMEL References

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

References

  1.  
    1. Redford M, Drury TF, Kingman A, Brown LJ. Denture use and the technical quality of dental prostheses among persons 18-74 years of age: United States, 1988-1991. J Dental Res. 1996;75(2_suppl):714-725.
  2.  
    1. Sharka R, Abed H, Hector M. Oral health-related quality of life and satisfaction of edentulous patients using conventional complete dentures and implant-retained overdentures: An umbrella systematic review. Gerodontology. 2019;36(3):195-204.
  3.  
    1. Boven GC, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Meijer HJ. Improving masticatory performance, bite force, nutritional state and patient's satisfaction with implant overdentures: a systematic review of the literature. J oral Rehabil. 2015;42(3):220-233.
  4.  
    1. Sivaramakrishnan G, Sridharan K. Comparison of implant supported mandibular overdentures and conventional dentures on quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. Aust Dent J. 2016;61(4):482-488.
  5.  
    1. Attard NJ, Zarb GA. Long-term treatment outcomes in edentulous patients with implant overdentures: the Toronto study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(4):425-433.
  6.  
    1. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Gerodontology. 2002;19(1):3-4.
  7.  
    1. 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):263-267.
  8.  
    1. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Van 't Hof MA. Comparison of implant-retained mandibular overdentures and conventional complete dentures: a 10-year prospective study of clinical aspects and patient satisfaction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(6):879-885.
  9.  
    1. Stoker GT, Wismeijer D, van Waas MA. An eight-year follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of aftercare and cost-analysis with three types of mandibular implant-retained overdentures. J Dent Res. 2007;86(3):276-280.
  10.  
    1. Goncalves F, Campestrini VLL, Rigo-Rodrigues MA, Zanardi PR. Effect of the attachment system on the biomechanical and clinical performance of overdentures: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(4):589-594.
  11.  
    1. Payne AG, Alsabeeha NH, Atieh MA, Esposito M, Ma S, Anas El-Wegoud M. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;10:CD008001.
  12.  
    1. Dantas Ide S, Souza MB, Morais MH, Carreiro Ada F, Barbosa GA. Success and survival rates of mandibular overdentures supported by two or four implants: a systematic review. Braz Oral Res. 2014;28:74-80.
  13.  
    1. Helmy MHE, Alqutaibi AY, El-Ella AA, Shawky AF. Effect of implant loading protocols on failure and marginal bone loss with unsplinted two-implant-supported mandibular overdentures: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;47(5):642-650.
  14.  
    1. Marcello-Machado RM, Faot F, Schuster AJ, Nascimento GG, Del Bel Cury AA. Mini-implants and narrow diameter implants as mandibular overdenture retainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes. J Oral Rehabil. 2018;45(2):161-183.
  15.  
    1. Park JH, Lee JY, Shin SW. Treatment outcomes for mandibular mini-implant-retained overdentures: a systematic review. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(3):269-276.
  16.  
    1. Zygogiannis K, Wismeijer D, Aartman IH, Osman RB. A systematic review on immediate loading of implants used to support overdentures opposed by conventional prostheses: factors that might influence clinical outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(1):63-72.
  17.  
    1. Lindhe J, Berglundh T. The interface between the mucosa and the implant. Periodontol. 2000;1998(17):47-54.
  18.  
    1. Listgarten MA, Lang NP, Schroeder HE, Schroeder A. Periodontal tissues and their counterparts around endosseous implants [corrected and republished with original paging, article orginally printed in Clin Oral Implants Res 1991 Jan-Mar;2(1):1-19]. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1991;2(3):1-19.
  19.  
    1. Heitz-Mayfield LJA, Salvi GE. Peri-implant mucositis. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(Suppl 20):S237-S245.
  20.  
    1. Adibrad M, Shahabuei M, Sahabi M. Significance of the width of keratinized mucosa on the health status of the supporting tissue around implants supporting overdentures. J Oral Implantol. 2009;35(5):232-237.
  21.  
    1. Renvert S, Persson GR, Pirih FQ, Camargo PM. Peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis: case definitions and diagnostic considerations. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(Suppl 20):S278-S285.
  22.  
    1. Peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. a current understanding of their diagnoses and clinical implications. J Periodontol. 2013;84(4):436-443.
  23.  
    1. Krygier G, Glick PL, Versman KJ, Dahlin CJ, Cochran DL. To minimize complications, is it essential that implant abutments be surrounded by keratinized tissue? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;12(1):127.
  24.  
    1. Rapley JW, Mills MP, Wylam J. Soft tissue management during implant maintenance. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1992;12(5):373-381.
  25.  
    1. Salvi GE, Lang NP. Diagnostic parameters for monitoring peri-implant conditions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(Suppl):116-127.
  26.  
    1. Schou S, Holmstrup P, Hjorting-Hansen E, Lang NP. Plaque-induced marginal tissue reactions of osseointegrated oral implants: a review of the literature. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1992;3(4):149-161.
  27.  
    1. Zigdon H, Machtei EE. The dimensions of keratinized mucosa around implants affect clinical and immunological parameters. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(4):387-392.
  28.  
    1. Elsyad MA, Maryod WH, Mostafa AZ. Effect of implant position on clinical and radiographic outcomes of locator-retained mandibular overdentures: a 1-year prospective study. J Prosthod. 2019;28(2):e699-e704.
  29.  
    1. Mericske-Stern RD, Taylor TD, Belser U. Management of the edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(suppl. 1):108-125.
  30.  
    1. Mumcu E, Bilhan H, Geckili O. The effect of attachment type and implant number on satisfaction and quality of life of mandibular implant-retained overdenture wearers. Gerodontology. 2012;29(2):e618-e623.
  31.  
    1. Myshin HL, Wiens JP. Factors affecting soft tissue around dental implants: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(5):440-444.
  32.  
    1. Suarez-Lopez Del Amo F, Lin GH, Monje A, Galindo-Moreno P, Wang HL. Influence of soft tissue thickness on peri-implant marginal bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2016;87(6):690-699.
  33.  
    1. Glauser R, Zembic A, Hammerle CH. A systematic review of marginal soft tissue at implants subjected to immediate loading or immediate restoration. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(suppl. 2):82-92.
  34.  
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1006-1012.
  35.  
    1. Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E Jr, Land NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1987;2(4):145-151.
  36.  
    1. Silness J, Loe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. Ii. correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condtion. Acta Odontol Scand. 1964;22:121-135.
  37.  
    1. Loe H, Silness J. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand. 1963;21:533-551.
  38.  
    1. Boven GC, Meijer HJA, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM. Maxillary implant overdentures retained by use of bars or locator attachments: 1-year findings from a randomized controlled trial. J Prosthodont Res. 2020;64(1):26-33.
  39.  
    1. Chiapasco M, Abati S, Romeo E, Vogel G. Implant-retained mandibular overdentures with Branemark System MKII implants: a prospective comparative study between delayed and immediate loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16(4):537-546.
  40.  
    1. Elsyad MA, Al-Mahdy YF, Fouad MM. Marginal bone loss adjacent to conventional and immediate loaded two implants supporting a ball-retained mandibular overdenture: a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(4):496-503.
  41.  
    1. Elsyad MA, Denewar BA, Elsaih EA. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of bar, telescopic, and locator attachments for implant-stabilized overdentures in patients with mandibular atrophied ridges: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33(5):1103-1111.
  42.  
    1. Elsyad MA, Elsaih EA, Khairallah AS. Marginal bone resorption around immediate and delayed loaded implants supporting a locator-retained mandibular overdenture. A 1-year randomised controlled trial. J Oral Rehabil. 2014;41(8):608-618.
  43.  
    1. Gotfredsen K, Holm B. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with ball or bar attachments: a randomized prospective 5-year study. Int J Prosthodont. 2000;13(2):125-130.
  44.  
    1. Karabuda C, Tosun T, Ermis E, Ozdemir T. Comparison of 2 retentive systems for implant-supported overdentures: soft tissue management and evaluation of patient satisfaction. J Periodontol. 2002;73(9):1067-1070.
  45.  
    1. 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):722-728.
  46.  
    1. Naert I, Alsaadi G, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M. A 10-year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining mandibular overdentures: peri-implant outcome. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(5):695-702.
  47.  
    1. Park JH, Shin SW, Lee JY. Bar versus ball attachments for maxillary four-implant retained overdentures: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30(11):1076-1084.
  48.  
    1. Policastro VB, Paleari AG, Leite ARP, et al. A randomized clinical trial of oral health-related quality of life, peri-implant and kinesiograph parameters in wearers of one-or two-implant mandibular overdentures. J Prosthod. 2019;28(7):757-765.
  49.  
    1. Salman A, Thacker S, Rubin S, Dhingra A, Ioannidou E, Schincaglia GP. Immediate versus delayed loading of mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a 60-month follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2019;46(8):863-871.
  50.  
    1. Seo YH, Bae EB, Kim JW, et al. Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment. J Adv Prosthod. 2016;8(4):313-330.
  51.  
    1. Slot W, Raghoebar GM, Cune MS, Vissink A, Meijer HJ. Maxillary overdentures supported by four or six implants in the anterior region: 5-year results from a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2016;43(12):1180-1187.
  52.  
    1. Turkyilmaz I, Tozum TF, Fuhrmann DM, Tumer C. Seven-year follow-up results of TiUnite implants supporting mandibular overdentures: early versus delayed loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(suppl. 1):e83-e90.
  53.  
    1. Visser A, Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, Batenburg RH, Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants. A 5-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16(1):19-25.
  54.  
    1. Zou D, Wu Y, Huang W, et al. A 3-year prospective clinical study of telescopic crown, bar, and locator attachments for removable four implant-supported maxillary overdentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26(6):566-573.
  55.  
    1. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.
  56.  
    1. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. CASP Checklists. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP): Making Sense of Evidence. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme; 2014.
  57.  
    1. Roos-Jansaker AM, Lindahl C, Renvert H. Nine- to fourteen-year follow-up of implant treatment. Part II: presence of peri-implant lesions. J Clin Periodontol. 2006;33(4):290-295.
  58.  
    1. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29(suppl. 3):197-212; discussion 32-33.
  59.  
    1. Keshk AM, Alqutaibi AY, Algabri RS, Swedan MS, Kaddah A. Prosthodontic maintenance and peri-implant tissue conditions for telescopic attachment-retained mandibular implant overdenture: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Eur J Dent. 2017;11(4):559-568.
  60.  
    1. Moraschini V, Porto Barboza E. Immediate versus conventional loaded single implants in the posterior mandible: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45(1):85-92.
  61.  
    1. Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Maghaireh H, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(3):CD003878.

Page Navigation