Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science (구강회복응용과학지)

Korean Academy of Stomatognathic Function and Occlusion (대한턱관절교합학회)
권호 표지

A Comparative Study on the Retention of Implant Overdenture According to the Shape and the Number of Magnetic Attachment

자성 어태치먼트의 형태와 수에 따른 하악 임플란트 피개의치의 유지력에 대한 비교 연구

  • Seo, Min-Ji (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Lee, Joon-Seok (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Cho, In-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 서민지 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 이준석 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 조인호 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실)
  • Received : 2008.03.10
  • Accepted : 2008.06.25
  • Published : 2008.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the retention and stability of implant overdenture according to the shape and the number of magnetic attachment. The experimental groups were designed for the number of implants(1, 2, 4) and shape of magnetic attachments(flat, cushion, dome type) resulting in 9 subgroups. 45 attachments were tested attached to $Br{\aa}nemark$ system implants which were planted on a mandibular model. Each attachment was composed of the magnet assembly embedded in a overdenture sample and the abutment keeper screwed into the implants. Dislodging tensile forces were applied to the overdenture samples using an Instron(cross-head speed 50.80mm/min) in 3 directions simulating function: vertical, oblique, and anterior-posterior. The loading was repeated 10 times in each direction for 45 samples. The values of maximum dislodging force of each subgroup were processed statistically using SPSS V. 12.0 at the 0.05 level of significance. The results of this study were as follows: 1. Flat type magnetic overdenture was the most retentive when subjected to vertically directed forces and dome type was the lest retentive when subjected to obliquely directed forces(p<0.05). 2. In case of planting one implant, flat type had a higher vertically retentive force than anterior-posteriorly retentive force. In case of planting two implants, flat type and dome type had a higher vertically retentive force and in case of planting four implants, flat type and cushion type had a higher vertically retentive force than anterior-posteriorly retentive force(p<0.05). 3. The incremental number of dental implant, without regards to the three types of magnetic attachment shapes, showed higher retention of overdenture(p<0.05). From the results, if a patient need much more retention of implant overdenture, flat type magnetic overdenture would be a good treatment. In case of the bruxism where excessive lateral forces are already present, dome type could be expected to produce better results. In case of planting one implant, flat type is more stable than the other shape of magnet and in case of two implant, flat type and dome type are more stable and in case of four implants, flat type and cushion type are more stable. Planting more than two implants and using flat type magnetic attachment would provide better retention and stability of implant overdenture

치과용 자석의 개선으로 자성 어태치먼트를 이용한 임플란트 피개의치의 사용이 늘고 있다. 또한 여러 형태의 자성 어태치먼트가 개발되어 임상 상황에 따라 적절히 선택하여 사용할 수 있게 되었다. 이에 시중에 판매되는 세 가지 형태의 임플란트용 자성 어태치먼트를 이용해 자성 어태치먼트의 형태와 임플란트 수에 따른 임플란트 피개의치의 유지력을 비교 분석하였다. 식립된 임플란트가 1개인 경우를 1군, 2개인 경우 2군, 4개인 경우를 3군으로 하였고, 자성 어태치먼트의 형태에 따라 flat type, cushion type, dome type으로 세분하였다. Instron으로 수직방향, 사선방향, 전후방향의 인장력을 가하여 자성 어태치먼트의 형태에 따른 유지력의 차이, 힘의 방향에 따른 유지력의 차이, 자성 어태치먼트의 수에 따른 유지력의 변화를 비교 분석하여 다음의 결과를 얻었다. 1) 임플란트의 수와 상관없이 수직력은 flat type이 가장 컸으며, 측방력은 dome type이 가장 작은 것으로 나타났다. 2) 임플란트가 1개일 때 flat type의 수직력이 전후방회전력보다 크게 나타났고, 임플란트가 2개일 때는 dome type과 flat type이, 임플란트가 4개일 때는 cushion type과 flat type에서 수직력이 전후방회전력보다 크게 나타났다. 3) 임플란트 수에 따른 유지력 측정결과, 자석의 형태에 상관없이 임플란트 수가 많을수록 유지력은 증가하였다. 이상의 결과로 볼 때, 큰 유지력이 필요한 환자에게는 flat type이, 유해한 수평력이 존재하는 환자에게는 dome type의 이용이 유리하고, 임플란트가 1개일 때 flat type, 2개일 때 dome type과 flat type, 임플란트가 4개일 때 cushion type과 flat type이 피개의치의 안정성이 더 좋은 것으로 나타났다. 또한 자성 어태치먼트의 형태에 상관없이 임플란트의 수가 증가할수록 더 큰 유지력을 나타냈다. 따라서 임플란트 피개의치 사용 시 적절한 유지력과 안정성을 얻기 위해서 임플란트의 수와 자성 어태치먼트 형태의 고려가 필요하다고 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Gunne HS, Bergman B, Enbom L, Hogstrom J. Masticatory efficiency of complete denture patients. Acta Odontol Scand 1982;40:289-97 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016358209024072
  2. Haraldson T, Karlsson U, Carlsson GE. Bite force and oral function in complete denture wearers. J Oral Rehabil 1979;6:41-48 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1979.tb00403.x
  3. Parel SM. Implants and overdentures: The osseointegrated approach with conventional and compromised applications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:93-99
  4. chikawa T, Horiuchi M, Matsmoto N. In vitro study of mandibular implant-retained overdentures: The influence of stud attachment on load transfer to implant and soft tissue. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:394-99
  5. Kenney R, Richards MW. Photoelastic stress patterns produced by implant retained overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 1996;80:559-64
  6. Engquist B, Bergendal T, Kallus T, Linden U. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseointegrated implants supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:129-34
  7. Mensor MC Jr. Attachment fixation for overdentures. Part I. J Prosthet Dent 1977;37:366-373 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(77)90137-8
  8. Miller PA. Complete dentures supported by natural teeth. Text Dent J 1965;83:4-8
  9. Preiskel HW. Overdentures made easy. A guide to implant and root supported prostheses. 1st ed. London UK, Quintessence. 1996:105-138
  10. Mensor MC Jr. Removable partial overdenture with mechanical (precision) attachments. Dent Clin North Am 1990;34:669-81
  11. Gendusa NJ. Magnetically retained overlay dentures. Quint Int 1988;19:265-71
  12. Kroone HB, Bates JF. Overdenture with magnetic retainers. British Dental J. 1982;152:310-13 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4804808
  13. Jackson TR. The application of rare earth magnetic retention to osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 1986;17:571-86
  14. Walmslely AD. Magnetic retention in prosthetic Dentistry. Dent Update 2002;29:428-33 https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2002.29.9.428
  15. Highton R, Caputo AA, Matyas M, Matyas J. The interaction of a magnetically retained denture with osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:486-90 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90255-7
  16. Burns DR, Unger JW, Elswiok RK Jr, Beck DA. Prospective clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdenture: Part I - Retention, stability, and tissue response. J prosthet Dent 1995;73:354-63 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80331-2
  17. Walmsley AD, Brady CL, Smith PL, Frame JW. Magnet retained overdentures using th Astra dental implant system. Br Dent J 1993;174:399-404 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4808185
  18. Magnet Attachment for Esthetic Prosthetics. Shin JW. Myungmoon. 1st ed. 2001:10-24
  19. The Academy of prosthodontics. Glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:50-107
  20. Gillings BR. Magnetic denture retention systems. In: Prieskel HW. Precision attachments in prosthodontics. 2nd ed. Quintessence book. 1986:191-241
  21. Sarnat AE. The efficiency of cobalt samarium magnet as retentive unit for overdentures. J Dent 1983;11: 324-33 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(83)90117-3
  22. Lewandowski JA, White KC, Moore D, Johnson C. An investigation of two rare earth magnetic systems by measuring grip force and reseating force. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:705-11 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90404-0
  23. Akaltan F, Can G. Retentive characteristics of different dental magnetic systems. J Prosthet Dent 1995;75:422-27
  24. Hur KS, Hur SJ, Cho IH. A comparative of retentive force of various overdentures using several magnet. The Journal of Korean Prosthetics 1991;29:11-20
  25. Petropoulos VC, Smith W. Maximum dislodging force of implant overdentures stud attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:526-35
  26. Ma PS, Shin SW. Three dimensional finite element analysis on the madibular implant-supported overdentures depending upon the type of magnetic attachments and number of fixtures. MS thesis 2005(1), Department of prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University