View clinical trials related to Jaw, Edentulous.
Filter by:complete denture wearers struggle to eat well with their dentures due to poor denture retention, stability, and occlusal disharmony. So, the current study protocol aims to compare the occlusion/ disocclusion time in immediately loaded implant retained overdentures supported by two interforaminal implants; splinted versus non splinted dental implants compared to the conventional complete denture.
To compare the accuracy of digital impression and conventional impression for complete-arch implant-supported fixed prosthesis
To evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of KS implants used to rehabilitate edentulous mandible with dental-retained overdentures, and to compare it with same treatment on TS implants
This pilot study aims to compare the difference, if present in patient satisfaction, denture base adaptation and retention in 3d printed maxillary complete dentures fabricated at a build angle of 0 degrees versus 45 degrees.
CAD/CAM (computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing) can be a game-changer for better access to care by edentulous patients. Digital overdentures offer potential for more satisfied patients due to better fit and can be provided faster/with lower costs. Providing digital overdentures has potential to enhance access to oral healthcare by the elderly, given the expected benefits (better quality, simpler, faster and more affordable than those obtained traditionally). However, evidence from randomized trials is crucial to verify the relevance of those benefits, especially from the patient perspective, and to confirm those benefits. This trial also serves as an opportunity to improve CAD software and materials, since it will identify technical challenges specific to the provision of digital overdentures. This randomized cross-over trial aims to reveal whether implant-retained mandibular overdentures (IMO) produced by CAD and 3D printing are more satisfactory to edentulous seniors than those fabricated using traditional methods. The investigators will recruit 26 edentulous participants (any sex/gender) amongst previous patients at McGill University, based on the following eligibility criteria: complete edentulism, elderly (age ≥60 years, according to the WHO), need for new maxillary and mandibular complete dentures, ability to complete questionnaires, and previous treatment with two implants in the anterior mandible. Each participant will receive two pairs of dentures, as per the McGill Consensus on Implant Overdentures (i.e., a mandibular overdenture opposed by a maxillary complete denture: (i) one by digital rendering of the mouth, virtual prosthetic design and 3D printing; (ii) a control pair, by traditional clinical and laboratory methods. Each pair will be worn for 3 months according to a random sequence (total follow-up: 6 months after the delivery of the first pair of dentures). Both overdentures will be retained by 2 Novaloc abutments and medium retention matrices. Outcomes will include patient satisfaction ratings and oral health-related quality of life. The investigators will evaluate other patient-reported outcomes, as well as clinician-assessed quality and cost. Outcome assessment will occur at baseline, then at three months after participants have worn each pair of dentures. Following the cross-over, participants will keep their preferred denture pair and return after 12 months to evaluate maintenance requirements, including stained and broken dentures.
- Background Patients experiencing problems with their conventional maxillary denture can benefit from implant- retained overdentures. Several retention systems are available. These retention systems can be roughly divided into bar-retained implant overdentures, in which multiple implants are splinted and the overdenture is attached through retentive clips, and into retention systems using non-splinted solitary attachments (locators). Evidence on maxillary implant overdenture attachment systems has been mostly short to medium term, non-comparing or retrospective. Even more, 10-years data of comparative studies are lacking. - Main research question To compare treatment outcomes of fully edentulous patients with maxillary overdentures, supported by four implants, retained by either bars or locators . The primary objective of the study is to analyze marginal bone level changes by radiological assessments at 10-years follow-up. Secondary objectives are implant and overdenture survival, condition of peri- implant mucosa and patients' satisfaction. - Design (including population, confounders/outcomes) The study design is an observational study of a group of patients which were treated 10 years ago with dental implants and an overdenture in the maxilla because of problems with retention and stability with their conventional denture. Outcomes: primary outcome is the change in marginal peri-implant bone level 10 years after placing the overdenture. Secondary outcome measures will be implant and overdenture survival, peri-implant mucosa health and patients' satisfaction using a questionnaire.
Fourteen completely edentulous patients will be randomly allocated into two parallel arm groups. For both groups virtual implant planning will be done and surgical guide will be planned and printed. An immediate interim full arch PMMA prosthesis will be virtually designed and printed for both groups. For the Intraoral welding group, seven patients will receive immediately loaded interim fixed full arch prosthesis splinted by intraoral welded bar. While for PEEK group in which seven patients will receive immediately loaded interim fixed full arch prosthesis splinted by PEEK bar. Marginal bone loss will be clinically evaluated at four, six months follow up period using CBCT.
This is a single-center, single-group, prospective clinical trial testing a partially-guided protocol for placement of mini implants overdentures in the edentulous maxilla. Eligible participants will be subjects with an edentulous maxilla, wearing a conventional complete denture. Participants will receive six mini implants (Straumann® Mini Implant System, Institut Straumann AG, Switzerland) for retention of a maxillary overdenture. The six mini implant protocol will be virtually planned for an even distribution of the implants bilaterally, with a minimum of 5 mm distance between contiguous implants. The available lengths of the mini implants are 10, 12, and 14 mm, and the appropriate length will be selected according to the bony anatomical situation. In addition, the distribution and axial position of the mini implants will be planned to achieve the best biomechanical distribution and the most parallel position between implants, perpendicular to the occlusal plane and path of insertion of the prosthesis. The primary outcome will be the accuracy of the implant position using the partially-guided protocol. Assessment of the accuracy of the methods will be based on the measure of the difference between the actual and the planned position of the mini implants, based on the measurement of (1) the global deviations at the coronal and apical regions of the mini implants, (2) the vertical deviation, and (3) the apical angle deviation. Overall impacts of treatment on oral health-related quality of life will be assessed using the Oral Health Impact Profile instrument for edentulous subjects (OHIP-EDENT). Additional outcomes will include implant survival and success rates, incidence of prosthodontic complications and peri-implant measurements.
Group I (control) Edentulous mandible receiving all on four fixed mandibular prosthesis using conventionally screw retained multiunit abutments. Group II (intervention) Edentulous mandible receiving all on four fixed prostheses using OT bridge attachments system. For both groups, the implant sites will be prepared aided by the surgical template. 4 implants with length 11-13 mm will be placed, two anterior implants will be aligned in an axial orientation and two posterior implants will be distally aligned according to the all-on-four concept in the inter foraminal area. Implants will be ideally placed at bone level. For both groups: After implant placement and surgical guide removal, healing abutments ( will be connected during healing periods (eight to twelve weeks). Group I ( control) After eight to twelve weeks from implant placement, multiunit abutments with appropriate heights and angulations will be connected to the implants. Group II ( intervention) After eight to twelve weeks from implant placement, narrow- and low-profile OT Equator abutment will be screwed onto the implants according to the manufacturer. marginal bone changes and prosthetic complications are the outcomes Radiographic follow up will be performed for marginal bone changes Serial of standardized digital periapical radiographs using will be taken at the time fixed prosthesis insertion (baseline), 3,6,9,12 months. Type and incidence of prosthetic complications for the prothesis for each group will be evaluated in 3, 6,9 and 12 months, these complications included: loosening or fracture of the prosthetic screw, prosthesis mobility and fracture of the prosthesis.
This study aims to investigate the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impression using newly designed scan bodies with extensional structure.