J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2017 Jul;55(3):292-299. 10.4047/jkap.2017.55.3.292.

Rehabilitation using mandibular implant overdenture with CAD/CAM milled bar: A case report

• Ban MH
• Yang H
• Park SW
• Lim HP
• Yun KD
• Shin JH
• Park C

• KMID: 2387202
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2017.55.3.292

Abstract

Long-term alveolar bone resorption in edentulous patient causes difficulty in denture use. Applying an implant overdenture with 2 to 4 implants to edentulous patient is easily approachable. Moreover, it improves denture stability, support, and retention. Milled bar, the attachment used in implant overdenture, can be used to induce better stability and retention to the supporting structure than conventional bar. It has become convenient to use due to the development of CAD/CAM system which had allowed the simplification of dental techniques. In this case, application of conventional maxillary full denture and mandibular overdenture made of CAD/CAM milled bar with 4 implants showed satisfactory results in the patient who had used upper and lower full dentures for a long time.

Keyword

Implant overdenture; Milled-bar; CAD/CAM

MeSH Terms

Bone Resorption
Denture Retention
Denture, Overlay*
Dentures
Humans
Rehabilitation*

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Initial panoramic radiograph.

• 

  Fig. 2 Initial intraoral photographs. (A, E) Occlusal view of maxilla and mandible, (B, D) Lateral view, (C) Frontal view.

• 

  Fig. 3 Intraoral view of the patient's old denture. (A, C) Occlusal view of maxilla and mandible, (B) Frontal view.

• 

  Fig. 4 Implant installation. (A) Panoramic view, (B) Frontal view, (C) Mandibular occlusal view.

• 

  Fig. 5 Final impression taking of maxilla and mandible (B, E) with individual trays (A, D) and Definitive cast fabrication of maxilla and mandible (C, F).

• 

  Fig. 6 Laboratory procedures using Exocad software. (A) Scanned solid abutments (gray), Mandibular teeth arrangement according to the maxillary temporary denture (purple) and antagonistic teeth (blue), (B) Confirmation of bar position, (C, D) Design of milled bar and decision of the position of customized clip.

• 

  Fig. 7 Fabrication of milled bar and verification of bar with metal framework and PEKK clip positioned in the oral cavity (A, B, C).

• 

  Fig. 8 Esthetic try-in with wax denture. (A, C) Occlusal view of maxilla and mandible, (B) Frontal view.

• 

  Fig. 9 Final restoration was placed in patient's oral cavity. (A, C) Occlusal view of maxilla and mandible, (B) Frontal view.

• 

  Fig. 10 Patient's profile. (A) Profile at first visit, (B) Profile after definitive prosthesis placement.

Reference

1. Cordioli G, Majzoub Z, Castagna S. Mandibular overdentures anchored to single implants: a five-year prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 78:159–165.

2. Jemt T, Chai J, Harnett J, Heath MR, Hutton JE, Johns RB, McKenna S, McNamara DC, van Steenberghe D, Taylor R, Watson RM, Herrmann I. A 5-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996; 11:291–298.

3. Shayan N, Ashish C, Mohamad I, Muzafar A. Implant supported overdenture: an alternative to conventional denture- a case report. J Dent Med Sci. 2016; 15:39–42.

4. 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; 38:857–869.

5. Sadowsky SJ. Mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 86:468–473.

6. Burns DR. Mandibular implant overdenture treatment: consensus and controversy. J Prosthodont. 2000; 9:37–46.

7. Krennmair G, Krainhöfner M, Piehslinger E. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with a milled bar: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007; 22:987–994.

8. Bakke M, Holm B, Gotfredsen K. Masticatory function and patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a prospective 5-year study. Int J Prosthodont. 2002; 15:575–581.

9. Berretin-Felix G, Nary Filho H, Padovani CR, Trindade AS Junior, Machado WM. Electromyographic evaluation of mastication and swallowing in elderly individuals with mandibular fixed implant-supported prostheses. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008; 16:116–121.

10. Carlsson GE, Lindquist LW. Ten-year longitudinal study of masticatory function in edentulous patients treated with fixed complete dentures on osseointegrated implants. Int J Prosthodont. 1994; 7:448–453.

11. Spyropoulou PE, Razzoog ME, Duff RE, Chronaios D, Saglik B, Tarrazzi DE. Maxillary implant-supported bar overdenture and mandibular implant-retained fixed denture using CAD/CAM technology and 3-D design software: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:356–362.

12. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J. 2008; 204:505–511.

13. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007; 28:4845–4869.

14. Toth JM, Wang M, Estes BT, Scifert JL, Seim HB 3rd, Turner AS. Polyetheretherketone as a biomaterial for spinal applications. Biomaterials. 2006; 27:324–334.

15. Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, Schmidlin PR. Polyetheretherketone-a suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013; 101:1209–1216.

16. Liebermann A, Wimmer T, Schmidlin PR, Scherer H, Löffler P, Roos M, Stawarczyk B. Physicomechanical characterization of polyetheretherketone and current esthetic dental CAD/CAM polymers after aging in different storage media. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115:321–328.