View clinical trials related to Jaw, Edentulous.
Filter by:Forty patients ( 24female and16 male )with completely edentulous maxilla and mandible . All patients received implant supported mandibular and maxillary overdentures. The patients were randomly divided into two groups according to attachments retaining Max IOD that supported by four axial implants in maxilla . The TA was used to retain group I (GrI) MaxIOD , while that of group II (Gr II) was retained by LA. MaxIOD retention and MBL(vertical and horizontal) around implants of both groups was recorded at time of insertion (R0) ,then twelve(R12)and (R24) months following insertion of the prosthesis.
The goal of this split-mouth randomized clinical trial study was to investigate the effect of using a laser on pain and discomfort following flapless dental implant surgery. It was hypothesized that laser did not have any impact on post-op pain. Therefore, the study aimed to compare pain and discomfort following flapless dental implant surgeries with or without a laser.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate open faced maxillary complete denture with soft acryl resin wing versus conventional heat cured maxillary complete denture regarding the retention and patient satisfaction.
CAD/CAM-fabricated PEEK bar exhibited greater dimensional deviation in comparison to its titanium counterpart. Nevertheless, patients with PEEK bars reported higher satisfaction levels and lower marginal bone loss when compared to those with titanium bars.
the aim of this study is to compare the influence of different palatal vault configurations on the accuracy and scan speed of IO scans in cases of completely edentulous arches. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in scanning time, and trueness and precision of IO scans between class I, II and III palatal vault configurations.
The goal of this cross-over clinical trial is to investigate the precision of digital implant impressions using an intraoral scanner and photogrammetry in obtaining complete-arch implant-supported scans. The main question[s] it aims to answer are: - Is there a difference in precision between intraoral scans and photogrammetry in obtaining digital implant scans? - Will arch perimeter and jaw type (maxilla vs. mandible) affect the precision results? Procedures: At each appointment, participants existing permanent/temporary prosthesis or healing caps were unscrewed and temporarily removed for the period of the consultation appointment. Scanbodies were screwed into their implants for the duration of the appointment. They underwent two types of digital implant impression procedures (five times each), including intraoral scan and photogrammetry. Intraoral and extraoral photography were taken. At the end of each appointment, the scanbodies were removed, and existing bridge/healing caps were reinserted. The procedures were not painful or required any form of local anesthetic Comparison group: Researchers compared the precision of intraoral scanning vs. photogrammetry to see which device provided the best precision outcomes.
Purpose: To compare the loss of peri-implant tissue by means of radiographic and digital analysis of a zirconia prosthesis placed immediately and delay loading. Materials and methods: 60 consecutive patients with the need for a full-arch rehabilitation were selected and divided randomly into two groups: Group A: Conventional dental extraction, placement of 6 to 8 implants. Placement of the multi-unit prosthetic attachment and finally in the same week the placement of the definitive monolithic zirconia prosthesis on implants. Group B: Conventional dental extraction, placement of 6 to 8 implants. Placement of prosthetic and provisional attachment. After 3 months, place the definitive prosthesis. Assess volumetric changes using radiographic and optical scan techniques. The number of implant failures, prosthetic incidents and bone loss around the implants will be evaluated. The data will be evaluated 3, 6, and 12 months after the operation.
This study examines the effects of prosthetic treatment options applied to edentulous geriatric individuals who applied to Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry on chewing function, food consumption status, malnutrition status and oral health-related quality of life.
28 participants with edentulous maxillary arches were randomly selected and enrolled in two equal groups; Group I conventional impression group (CIG) and Group II Digital impression group (DIG). All patients were rehabilitated with maxillary screw-retained implant prosthesis retained by 6 implants. Prosthodontic complications and peri-implant MBL were registered at 6,12, and 24 months (m). Data was collected and statistically analyzed.
This descriptive longitudinal study aimed to investigate the retention force of implant-supported overdentures applied to edentulous individuals at Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry, examine the retention force and its time-dependent change, and evaluate patient satisfaction.