COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROSTHETIC REHABILITATION OF PATIENTS WITH COMPLETELY EDENTULOUS JAWS USING DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR IMPLANT- SUPPORTED STRUCTURES

Abstract

Objectives: To conduct a comparative analysis the effectiveness of prosthetic rehabilitation of patients with completely edentulous jaws using various options for implant-supported structures. Materials and methods: We examined and carried out complex treatment with the installation of implants in 82 patients (56 to 73 aged) years with completely edentulous jaws. All patients underwent a clinical examination and using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) analyzed of residual bone. Patients with edentulous were rehabilitated with three implant-supported prosthetic protocols. The patient was divided into 3 groups: 21 (1grup.) patients received removable overdenture supported by 4 implants using a bar system, 19 (2grup) patients received removable overdenture supported by 4 implants using rail system of attachments, 23 (3grup) patients received fixed restorations supported by 4 implants. Peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL), immediately (base line for comparison) and 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years after implant installation, compared with values at last follow-up. The method of questioning patients was used. The assessment was carried out using a point system: chewing efficiency, ease of care and use, stability of the dentures. Quality of life, assess used the Oral health-related quality of life the OHIP-G scale. Results: In clinical follow-up the implants showed no mobility, soreness or pain during function, patients had healthy soft tissues. For patients 1group MBL after 1 year 0.82 mm, after 3 years 1.23 mm, after 5 years was 1.46 mm. For patients 2group MBL after 1 year 0.84 mm, after 3 years 1.28 mm, after 5 years was 1.49 mm. For patients 3 group MBL after 1 year 0.91 mm, after 3 years 1.32 mm, after 5 years was 1.53mm. The patients were satisfied with the result of treatment using implants. Speech adaptation of patients with removable dentures, fixed implants, occurred within a week. 5-year implants cumulative survival rate 1group rates was 96.7%, 2 group was 97.2%, 3 group rates was 96,9%. The prosthesis cumulative survival rate 1group was 96.7%, 2 group was 97.4%, 3 group was 97,6%. Conclusion: Implant-supporting structures on implants, installed between the mental foramens, are a reliable and predictable method for patients with complete edentulous jaws and significant jaw resorption. This solution is a reliable alternative to bone grafting, demonstrating fewer complications, fewer additional surgical procedures, and demonstrating satisfactory long-term survival.