J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2016 Jul;54(3):239-245. 10.4047/jkap.2016.54.3.239.

Clinical evaluation of the removable partial dentures with implant fixed prostheses

• Kang SH
• Kim SK
• Heo SJ
• Koak JY
• Lee JH
• Park JM

• KMID: 2344862
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.3.239

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to identify clinical complications in removable partial denture (RPD) with implant-supported surveyed prostheses, and to analyze the factors associated with the complications such as location of the implant, splinting adjacent prostheses, the type of retentive clasps, Kennedy classification, and opposing dentition.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A retrospective clinical study was carried out for 11 patients (7 male, 4 female), mean age of 67.5, who received RPD with Implant-supported surveyed prostheses between 2000 and 2016. The mechanical complications of 11 RPDs and 37 supporting implant prostheses and the state of natural teeth and peripheral soft tissue were examined. Then the factors associated with the complications were analyzed.
RESULTS
The average of 3.4 implant-supported prostheses were used for each RPD. Complications found during the follow-up period of an average of 42.1 months were in order of dislodgement of temporary cement-retained prostheses, opposing tooth fracture/mobility, screw fracture/loosening, clasp loosening, veneer porcelain fracture, marginal bone resorption and mobility of implant, artificial tooth fracture. Complications occurred more frequently in anterior region compared to posterior region, non-splinted prostheses compared to splinted prostheses, surveyed prostheses applied by wrought wire clasp compared to other clasps, and natural dentition compared to other removable prostheses as opposing dentition. There were no significant differences in complications according to the Kennedy classification.
CONCLUSION
All implant-assisted RPD functioned successfully throughout the follow-up. However, further clinical studies are necessary because the clinical evidences are still not enough to guarantee the satisfactory prognosis of implant-assisted RPD for long-term result.

Keyword

Dental implant; Removable partial denture; Implant supported denture

MeSH Terms

Bone Resorption
Classification
Clinical Study
Dental Implants
Dental Porcelain
Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
Dentition
Denture, Partial, Removable*
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Prognosis
Prostheses and Implants*
Retrospective Studies
Splints
Tooth
Tooth Fractures
Dental Implants
Dental Porcelain

Reference

1.Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 3rd ed.Mosby: Elsevier;2008.

2.Naert I., Gizani S., Vuylsteke M., van Steenberghe D. A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction. J Oral Rehabil. 1999. 26:195–202.

3.Thomason JM. The McGill Consensus Statement on Overdentures. Mandibular 2-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2002. 10:95–6.

4.Ohkubo C., Kurihara D., Shimpo H., Suzuki Y., Kokubo Y., Hosoi T. Effect of implant support on distal extension removable partial dentures: in vitro assessment. J Oral Rehabil. 2007. 34:52–6.

5.Kaufmann R., Friedli M., Hug S., Mericske-Stern R. Removable dentures with implant support in strategic positions followed for up to 8 years. Int J Prosthodont. 2009. 22:233–41.

6.Kuzmanovic DV., Payne AG., Purton DG. Distal implants to modify the Kennedy classification of a removable partial denture: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2004. 92:8–11.

7.Mijiritsky E., Ormianer Z., Klinger A., Mardinger O. Use of dental implants to improve unfavorable removable partial denture design. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2005. 26:744–6. 748, 750.

8.Schneid T., Mattie P. Implant-assisted removable partial dentures. Phoenix RD, Cagna DR, DeFreest CF, editors. Stewart's clinical removable partial prosthodontics. 4th ed.Hanover Park; IL: Quintessence Publishing;2008. p. 259–77.

9.Kordatzis K., Wright PS., Meijer HJ. Posterior mandibular residual ridge resorption in patients with conventional dentures and implant overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003. 18:447–52.

10.Grossmann Y., Nissan J., Levin L. Clinical effectiveness of implant-supported removable partial dentures: a review of the literature and retrospective case evaluation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009. 67:1941–6.

11.Lacerda TESP., Laganà DC., Gonzàlez-LIMA R., Zanetti AL. Contribution to the planning of implant-supported RPD in the distal region. RPG Rev Po^′s Grad. 2005. 12:293–300.

12.Mijiritsky E. Implants in conjunction with removable partial dentures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2007. 16:146–54.

13.Ohkubo C., Kobayashi M., Suzuki Y., Hosoi T. Effect of implant support on distal-extension removable partial dentures: in vivo assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008. 23:1095–101.

14.Park JM., Koak JY., Kim SK., Joo JH., Heo SJ. Consideration for the combination treatment of removable partial denture and implant. Implantol. 2015. 19:104–11.

15.Ancowitz S. Esthetic removable partial dentures. Gen Dent. 2004. 52:453–9.

16.Mijiritsky E., Karas S. Removable partial denture design involving teeth and implants as an alternative to unsuccessful fixed implant therapy: a case report. Implant Dent. 2004. 13:218–22.

17.Vahidi F., Pinto-Sinai G. Complications associated with implant-retained removable prostheses. Dent Clin North Am. 2015. 59:215–26.

18.Mitrani R., Brudvik JS., Phillips KM. Posterior implants for distal extension removable prostheses: a retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003. 23:353–9.

19.Jang Y., Emtiaz S., Tarnow DP. Single implant-supported crown used as an abutment for a removable cast partial denture: a case report. Implant Dent. 1998. 7:199–204.

20.Pellecchia M., Pellecchia R., Emtiaz S. Distal extension mandibular removable partial denture connected to an anterior fixed implant-supported prosthesis: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 83:607–12.

21.Starr NL. The distal extension case: an alternative restorative design for implant prosthetics. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2001. 21:61–7.

22.Chronopoulos V., Sarafianou A., Kourtis S. The use of dental implants in combination with removable partial dentures: a case report. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2008. 20:355–64.

23.Saito M., Notani K., Miura Y., Kawasaki T. Complications and failures in removable partial dentures: a clinical evaluation. J Oral Rehabil. 2002. 29:627–33.

24.Bilhan H., Erdogan O., Ergin S., Celik M., Ates G., Geckili O. Complication rates and patient satisfaction with removable dentures. J Adv Prosthodont. 2012. 4:109–15.

25.Goodacre CJ., Bernal G., Rungcharassaeng K., Kan JY. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2003. 90:121–32.

26.Weinberg LA. Lateral forces in relation to the denture base and clasp design. J Prosthet Dent. 1956. 6:785–800.

27.Stoumpis C., Kohal RJ. To splint or not to splint oral implants in the implant-supported overdenture therapy? A systematic literature review. J Oral Rehabil. 2011. 38:857–69.

28.Miyaura K., Morita M., Matsuka Y., Yamashita A., Watanabe T. Rehabilitation of biting abilities in patients with different types of dental prostheses. J Oral Rehabil. 2000. 27:1073–6.