J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2016 Apr;54(2):146-151. 10.4047/jkap.2016.54.2.146.

Rehabilitation of edentulous maxilla with implant-supported milled bar overdenture using CAD/CAM customized abutment: A case report

• Ji W
• Chang JS
• Kwon JH
• Kim S

• KMID: 2162391
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.2.146

Abstract

In patients with fully edentulous maxilla, fabrication of implant-supported overdenture can be a viable treatment option, when a minimum of six implants were strategically placed. Among several attachment systems used for implant-supported overdentures, milled-bars prevent rotational movement of denture, thus showing great stability, and have the advantage of splinting multiple implants with each other. In this case report, a milled-bar supported overdenture was fabricated for a patient suffering from condition of fully edentulous maxilla with severe ridge resorption in the anterior residual ridge. Seven implants composed of three different systems were effectively utilized by CAD/CAM customized abutment and cement-retained milled bar.

Keyword

Dental implant; Implant overdenture; Milled-bar; CAD/CAM customized abutment

MeSH Terms

Dental Implants
Denture, Overlay*
Dentures
Humans
Maxilla*
Rehabilitation*
Splints
Dental Implants

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Panoramic radiograph (A) and intraoral photo (B) after uncovery surgery. Implant on i26 was removed due to failure of osseointegration.

• 

  Fig. 2. Final impression taking with individual tray and poly vinyl-siloxane (A), Definitive cast fabrication (B), Mounting of definitive cast after jaw relation record taking (C), Artificial tooth arrangement (D).

• 

  Fig. 3. Digital image of master cast and wax denture (A, B). CAD/CAM abutment designing considering enough space for bar, framework and denture tooth (B, C).

• 

  Fig. 4. CAD/CAM abutment and acrylic resin bar pattern. Cast and finished milled bar, Right (A, B, C), Left (D, E, F).

• 

  Fig. 5. Pick-up impression of milled-bar (A), Framework fabrication (B), Artificial tooth arrangement (C).

• 

  Fig. 6. Sandblasting (A), Cementation & excessive cement removal (B), Setting (C).

Reference

1.Doundoulakis JH., Eckert SE., Lindquist CC., Jeffcoat MK. The implant-supported overdenture as an alternative to the complete mandibular denture. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003. 134:1455–8.

2.van Kampen F., Cune M., van der Bilt A., Bosman F. Retention and postinsertion maintenance of bar-clip, ball and magnet attachments in mandibular implant overdenture treatment: an in vivo comparison after 3 months of function. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003. 14:720–6.

3.Petropoulos VC., Smith W., Kousvelari E. Comparison of retention and release periods for implant overdenture attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997. 12:176–85.

4.Trakas T., Michalakis K., Kang K., Hirayama H. Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2006. 15:24–34.

5.Krennmair G., Krainhöfner M., Piehslinger E. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with a milled bar: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007. 22:987–94.

6.Zarb GA., Bolender CL., Eckert SE., Fenton AH., Jacob RF., Mericske-Stern R. Prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients: Complete dentures and implant-supported prestheses. 12th ed.Mosby;2004.

7.Zitzmann NU., Marinello CP. Treatment plan for restoring the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported restorations: removable overdenture versus fixed partial denture design. J Prosthet Dent. 1999. 82:188–96.