Edentulous patients commonly experience a deterioration in the quality of life; both in terms of oral and general health. Studies demonstrated that conventional dentures do not adequately restore masticatory function nor quality of life. In contrast, implant-supported overdentures are considered the standard of care for edentulous patients as they offer a more stable prosthesis that ultimately results in improved oral function and patient satisfaction. Precision attachments such as studs, magnets, telescopic crowns or a bars are commonly used for implant supported overdentures. Implant overdentures supported by stud attachments gained popularity for the rehabilitation of edentulous patients as they are self-aligning, offer dual retention and compensate for divergence between implants up to angles of 40 degrees. However, it has been documented that the stud attachment system (Locators) requires a high frequency of maintenance, particularly with regard to the replacement of the matrix. In order to overcome some of these limitations of existing attachment systems, a newer system was developed consisting of a matrix made of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) instead of a polymeric material. This system has an amorphous diamond like carbon-based abutment coating (ADLC) and it was claimed to be more resistant to wear. Clinically and in vitro, no comparative studies have been performed addressing wear and retention of the traditional stud attachment and the newer ADLC attachment. Thus, the aim of the present study is to clinically and in vitro evaluate the ADLC and study attachment system.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
26
Each patient will receive 2 implants in the canine region using a guided-surgery protocol and a pre-prepared surgical stent. A healing abutment of an adequate size will be placed on the implant for transmucosal healing. The flaps will be subsequently sutured around the healing abutments. Patients' existing prostheses will be adjusted. Suture removal will be performed one week post implant placement. Three months later, implant level impressions will be made using the open tray technique. Each patient will be then be randomized using eCRF (electronic Case Report Form) to either ADLC group or LOC group. A final cast of the patients will be obtained and the attachments will be installed using an in-direct technique by a calibrated prosthodontists.
M.A.Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences & Research Center
Pune, India
Patient reported outcome measure
Mean VAS scores (visual analogue scale (0-100)) related to patient overall satisfaction for the ADLC and the LOC (Locator) attachment system provided by the patients
Time frame: After a functional period of 6 months
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): VAS
VAS scores (visual analogue scale (0-100)) based questionnaires about retention, stability of the prosthesis, maintenance of oral hygiene, ability to speak, comfort and aesthetics will be evaluated at screening
Time frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): OHIP-14
OHIP-14 (Oral Health Impact Profile) will be evaluated at screening (Questionnaire)
Time frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): Costs
Costs (INR) related to the entire treatment including additional appointments scheduled for repair and/or replacement of prostheses/matrix/matrix components
Time frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Technical outcomes:
Questionnaire (Wear of the polymeric and PEEK inserts, Deterioration of the PEEK and polymeric inserts, Initial and final retention of the two attachment systems)
Time frame: 6 months after the first and the second evaluation period, respectively
Clinical outcomes: PCR
Plaque control record (PCR) (Questionnaire: 0/1)
Time frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Clinical outcomes: BOP
Bleeding on probing (BOP) (Questionnaire: 0/1)
Time frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Clinical outcomes: PD
Probing depth (PD) (mm)
Time frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.