View clinical trials related to Edentulous Mouth.
Filter by:Real-life evaluation of the safety and performance of EUROTEKNIKA dental implants
Partial or total edentulousness has a significant impact on quality of life both functionally and aesthetically. TBR® Tissue Level Z1 Implants allow the patient to prevent bone resorption and maintain facial tissue and musculature support. At the functional level, the patient who benefits from implant treatment regains normal masticatory function with all the benefits on the quality of life that this can bring him. Due to the osseointegration of the implant and the biocompatibility of the materials used, the implant treatment remains effective in the long term and makes it possible to maintain the aesthetics of the smile.
Since the teeth loss leads to disability & impairment, and teeth restoration lead to improvement in the life quality throughout the oral health improvement. The acceptable function of a complete denture on great extent depends on impression technique which includes the maximum coverage of denture supporting areas and making a combination of managing movable soft tissues along with different kinds of impression materials and techniques for accurate reproduction of oral foundation. Border molding considered to be as an important step in the in complete denture fabrication, since the retention of complete dentures depend on several factors, as the biological, physical and mechanical, these factors could be achieved by mean of an accurate border molding followed by an accurate final impression. The border molding technique is the shaping of the border areas of a custom impression tray by manual or functional manipulation of the tissue adjacent to the borders in order to duplicate the size and contour of the vestibule resulting in maintains of the peripheral seal during function. This property causes the border molding process to require twenty-four insertions, namely eight in the maxilla and sixteen in the mandible causing long working time and discomfort in patients. Hence, the material used for this technique should provide optimum working time, have adequate body, and permit the correction of border moulding by additions. However additions if made to a single step border moulded material would again introduce all the disadvantages that are associated with sectional moulding Single-step border molding is considerably more straightforward than sectional border molding owing to the reduced number of tray insertions. This technique is usually used with elastomeric impression materials, which may not provide sufficient time to mold and record the peripheral tissues of the denture bearing area. The present technique uses light polymerizing tray material for molding tray borders, offering extended working time. This is advantageous for operators with less experience, such as dental school students. Furthermore, correction of border molding is possible with the addition of new material. The technique uses materials that are readily available,and no special armamentarium is required.
This study aims to test the combined effects of different loading protocols and surgical approaches on clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following the use of four mini implants for mandibular overdenture retention. The main study hypotheses are: 1. There are significant improvements in PROMs following implant intervention compared to baseline measures; 2. Immediately loaded mini implants have similar failure rates compared to mini implants receiving a delayed 6-week protocol. 3. Flapless surgery has similar post-insertion outcomes compared to flapped surgery.
A randomized clinical trial (RCT) was designed. Fourteen completely edentulous participants were randomly allocated into two equal groups. All participants received two implants in the inter-foraminal area with ball attachments. Participants in the control group were rehabilitated with conventionally manufactured Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) maxillary complete denture and mandibular implant overdentures while participants in intervention group received digital light processed (DLP)-printed photo-polymerizable PMMA Nextdent maxillary complete denture and mandibular implant overdentures. Follow-up appointments were scheduled at 3,6, and 12 months where data of Oral Health Impact Profile 19(OHIPEDENT19) was used to assess the OHRQoL (oral health related quality of life). In addition, denture retention was measured using digital force gauge device. Data were collected and statistically analyzed.
Fifty six patients were randomly enrolled in the study. Participants were randomly stratified into two control groups and two test groups, from which conventional pick up and digital impressions were made respectively. Patients of group 1 (CIG Axial) and 3 (DIG Axial) received 4 axial implants whereas, group 2 patients (CIG Tilted), and group 4 (DIG Tilted) received two anterior axial implants and two distal tilted implants. All participants received hybrid dentures. Bone loss, implant loss, maintenance of prosthesis were evaluated at 6m,12m, and 24 months follow up period.
A randomized clinical trial (RCT) was designed. The participants were randomly allocated into either of the two groups intervention or control group each of 14 participants. Participants in control group (Group-A) received conventional manufactured implant overdenture while participants in intervention group (Group-B) received CAD-CAM manufactured implant overdenture.
The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of the mandibular overdenture retained by one and two implants, based on a randomized clinical trial.
- Steps in short: Undergoing the conventional steps of maxillary single denture construction till the step of framework construction that will be designed and constructed using CAD/CAM after optical scanning of the master cast ( 2 frameworks to cover the palate and crest of the ridge : one made of titanium and the other made of cobalt/chromium) then conventional steps will be undergone including bite, Try-in and delivery ending by measuring the denture retention. - Number of visits & follow up period : Visits: will be 5-6 visits for each patient. Follow up period: 6.5 months (immediately post-insertion then after 1 week then after 3 months for the first type then 2 weeks washout period and the same for the second type)
On of the main fixed prosthetic options of completely edentulous patients is the screw-retained implant supported prosthesis which was constructed on transmucosal abutments with its encountered problems such as: hardness to make it passively seated with multiple screw fracture and loosening problems and multiple encountered veneer material fracture and so there effect on patient satisfaction with multiple maintenance recalls.so, the investigators want to try a new technique of fabrication which was proposed for reducing the problems of lack of passivity which is the intraoral luting cement technique on titanium bases with reduced screw number but, with luting cement problems as de-cementation and cement biological effects on soft tissues and bone and there effect on number of patient recall visits and maintenance and so there effect on patient satisfaction