The Effect of Implant Distribution on Functional and Patient‐Reported Outcomes of Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Four Mini Implants

ABSTRACT: PurposeThis study investigated the effects of implant distribution on functional and patient‐reported outcomes of patients treated with a mandibular overdenture retained by four mini implants.Materials and MethodsSeventy‐four participants received four titanium–zirconium mini implants in the anterior mandible, and the relative position of the implants was assessed in post‐treatment computed tomography scans with three reference points in the incisal region and first molars of the overdenture. DICOM files were analysed using Blooming Artefact Reduction filters to allow the visualisation of the mini implants in their three‐dimensional position without overlapping bone structures. The implant distribution parameters were the polygon area formed by the four mini implants (implant area), anterior and posterior cantilever extensions, and antero‐posterior spread. Outcomes included anterior and posterior maximum voluntary bite force (MBF), masticatory performance (MP), oral health‐related quality of life impacts (OHIP‐Edent) and satisfaction with the overdenture. Paired t‐test, Pearson's correlation test and multiple regression were used for data analysis.ResultsThe implant distribution area was the most relevant variable for all functional parameters. The larger the distribution, the better the MP (p = 0.003), and the anterior (p = 0.011) and posterior MBF (p < 0.001). Concerning patient‐reported outcomes, no effect of implant distribution was observed (p > 0.05), suggesting that the potential benefit of better distribution may not affect patients' perception of the treatment.ConclusionFindings corroborate the influence of implant distribution of the four mini implants on functional parameters and, although the best implant distribution may depend highly on anatomical factors, these parameters should be considered an important prognostic factor for treatment success.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04760457

Publication Details

Journal
Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Published
2025-05-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-278205
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Effect of Implant Distribution on Functional and Patient‐Reported Outcomes of Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Four Mini Implants

Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

The Effect of Implant Distribution on Functional and Patient‐Reported Outcomes of Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Four Mini Implants

article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT: PurposeThis study investigated the effects of implant distribution on functional and patient‐reported outcomes of patients treated with a mandibular overdenture retained by four mini implants.Materials and MethodsSeventy‐four participants received four titanium–zirconium mini implants in the anterior mandible, and the relative position of the implants was assessed in post‐treatment computed tomography scans with three reference points in the incisal region and first molars of the overdenture. DICOM files were analysed using Blooming Artefact Reduction filters to allow the visualisation of the mini implants in their three‐dimensional position without overlapping bone structures. The implant distribution parameters were the polygon area formed by the four mini implants (implant area), anterior and posterior cantilever extensions, and antero‐posterior spread. Outcomes included anterior and posterior maximum voluntary bite force (MBF), masticatory performance (MP), oral health‐related quality of life impacts (OHIP‐Edent) and satisfaction with the overdenture. Paired t‐test, Pearson's correlation test and multiple regression were used for data analysis.ResultsThe implant distribution area was the most relevant variable for all functional parameters. The larger the distribution, the better the MP (p = 0.003), and the anterior (p = 0.011) and posterior MBF (p < 0.001). Concerning patient‐reported outcomes, no effect of implant distribution was observed (p > 0.05), suggesting that the potential benefit of better distribution may not affect patients' perception of the treatment.ConclusionFindings corroborate the influence of implant distribution of the four mini implants on functional parameters and, although the best implant distribution may depend highly on anatomical factors, these parameters should be considered an important prognostic factor for treatment success.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04760457

Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Effect of Implant Distribution on Functional and Patient‐Reported Outcomes of Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Four Mini Implants · Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS