Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: The surgical placement of four maxillary implants for overdentures may not be obligatory when opposing mandibular two-implant overdentures. PURPOSE: To determine 10-year surgical outcomes and implant success of three narrow diameter implants in edentulous maxillae with conventional loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty participants with mandibular two-implant overdentures were randomly allocated for surgery for maxillary overdentures. Using osteotomes, three implants of similar systems were placed with a one-stage procedure and 12-week loading with splinted and unsplinted prosthodontic designs. Marginal bone and stability measurements were done at surgery, 12 weeks, 1-, 2-, 5-, 7-, 10 years. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen implants were placed in 39 participants, with 35 being seen at 1 year; 29 at 2 years; 28 at 5 years; 26 at 7 years; and 23 (59%) at 10 years. Marginal bone loss was 1.35 mm between surgery and 12 weeks; 0.36 mm between 12 weeks and 1 year; 0.48 mm between 1 and 5 years; and 0.22 mm between 5 and 10 years. Implant stability quotients were 56.05, 57.54, 60.88, 58.80, 61.17 at surgery, 12 weeks, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years. Four-field tables by implant showed success rates of 82% at 1 year; 69.2% at 2 years; 66.7% at 5 years; 61.5% at 7 years; 51.3% at 10 years. Data showed no differences between surgical technique, systems, or prosthodontic designs. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical placement with osteotomes of three narrow diameter implants for maxillary overdentures, opposing mandibular two-implant overdentures, is an acceptable approach, subject to strict patient selection. Implant success is independent of prosthodontic design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ma et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: