Course Objectives (2 CE Credits)
Implant-retained dentures present substantial advantages over traditional complete dentures. These appliances achieve a superior level of prosthetic stability and retention by attaching directly to implants or seating over retentive components that are connected to implants. This provides completely edentulous patients with a more comfortable restoration that considerably improves speech and chewing capabilities. Although these benefits are nothing short of life-changing, the acrylic body and prosthetic teeth of implant-supported dentures are vulnerable to wear and breakage. Amid technological advancements, clinicians can now provide their edentulous patients with prostheses fabricated from monolithic zirconia. Dr. Jack Hahn explains the benefits of this exceptionally durable prosthetic option while outlining the restorative process. Topics include:
- A comparison of traditional complete dentures and implant-retained prostheses
- The advantages monolithic zirconia full-arch restorations have over acrylic appliances
- Addressing functional and esthetic issues via full-arch implant restorations
- Methods for ensuring an accurate full-arch implant restoration that meets patient expectations
- The esthetic and functional issues posed by traditional dentures
- Clinical and laboratory steps involved in the fabrication of monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prostheses
- The effects of edentulism on the patient’s quality of life
- Ensuring a passive fit for fixed full-arch implant prostheses
- Mitigating bone resorption and its esthetic impact on the patient
- The benefits of provisionalization for full-arch implant restorations
Both removable and fixed implant restorations can dramatically improve oral function, esthetics and quality of life for fully edentulous patients. Their acrylic construction, however, can lead to ongoing maintenance, repairs or replacements. For patients that desire a more durable fixed implant restoration, the monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prosthesis can be delivered following a streamlined, predictable restorative process that includes several layers of verification to ensure an esthetic, well-fitting restoration. The clinical step-by-step protocol employs standard denture techniques, an implant verification jig and provisionalization to ensure an optimal outcome.
CAUTION: When viewing the techniques, procedures, theories and materials that are presented, you must make your own decisions about specific treatment for patients and exercise personal professional judgment regarding the need for further clinical testing or education and your own clinical expertise before trying to implement new procedures.
- Carlsson GE. Implant and root supported overdentures - a literature review and some data on bone loss in edentulous jaws. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014 Aug;6(4):245-52.
- Covani U, Cornelini R, Calvo JL, Tonelli P, Barone A. Bone remodeling around implants placed in fresh extraction sockets. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010 Dec;30(6):601-7.
- Rossein KD. Alternative treatment plans: implant-supported mandibular dentures. Inside Dentistry. 2006;2(6):42-3.
- Pan YH, Lin TM, Liang CH. Comparison of patient's satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures and complete dentures. Biomed J. 2014 May-Jun;37(3):156-62.
- Suzuki Y, Osada H, Kobayashi M, Katoh M, Kokubo Y, Sato J, Ohkubo C. Long-term clinical evaluation of implant over denture. J Prosthodont Res. 2012 Jan;56(1):32-6.
- Gonda T, Maeda Y, Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Fracture incidence in mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Mar;103(3):178-81.
- Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Van't Hof MA, Visser A. A controlled clinical trial of implant-retained mandibular overdentures: 10 years' results of clinical aspects and aftercare of IMZ implants and Brånemark implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Aug;15(4):421-7.