Case Presentation: Implant Retained Mandibular Prostheses

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter will present a clinical case describing the treatment of a lower edentulous patient with an implant-retained prosthesis. The surgical strategies underlining the placement and the distribution of the dental implants to optimize the prosthetic outcome will be highlighted and discussed. The various clinical and laboratory steps starting from the planning to the completion of the prostheses will be presented as well as the criteria for the selection of single attachments for this prosthetic design. This also includes the description and review of the various techniques available to connect the matrix component of the attachment to the denture base. The advantages of each technique will be discussed and their inconveniences highlighted.

Digital dentistry can present tremendous advantages for the elderly patient. This chapter will also present the various clinical steps and digital workflow involved in the fabrication of implant-retained mandibular complete dentures for the edentulous patient. The advantages and inconveniences related to the use of computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) in complete denture will be underlined.

References

  1. 1.
    Tjan AHL, Miller GD, The JGP. Some esthetic factors in a smile. J Prosthet Dent. 1984;51(1):24–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mesmar S, Nguyen TC, Wyatt C. Occlusal vertical dimension for complete removable dental prostheses. Can J Restor Dent Prosthodont. 2015;8(3):28–38.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Turrell AJ. Clinical assessment of vertical dimension. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;28(3):238–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Millet C, Leterme A, Jeannin C, Jaudoin P. [Vertical dimension in the treatment of the edentulous patient]. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac. 2010;111(5–6):315–30.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kimoto S, Pan S, Drolet N, Feine JS. Rotational movements of mandibular two-implant overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(8):838–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bidra AS, et al. Techniques for incorporation of attachments in implant-retained overdentures with unsplinted abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2012;107(5):288–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nissan J, Oz-Ari B, Gross O, Ghelfan O, Chaushu G. Long-term prosthetic aftercare of direct vs. indirect attachment incorporation techniques to mandibular implant-supported overdenture. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(6):627–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kawai Y, Murakami H, Shariati B, Klemetti E, Blomfield JV, Billette L, Lund JP, Feine JS. Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques? J Dent. 2005;33(8):659–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wimmer T, Gallus K, Eichberger M, Stawarczyk B. Complete denture fabrication supported by CAD/CAM. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(5):541–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ, Kattadiyil MT. Comparison of denture base adaptation between CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(2):249–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bidra AS, et al. Computer-aided technology for fabricating complete dentures: systematic review of historical background, current status, and future perspectives. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;109(6):361–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of DentistryMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Division of ProsthodonticsMcGill University Health CentreMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations