http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Anusar Gupta(Anusar Gupta ),Niraj Mishra(Niraj Mishra ),Pooran Chand(Pooran Chand ),Saumyendra Vikram Singh(Saumyendra Vikram Singh ),Raghuwar Dayal Singh(Raghuwar Dayal Singh ),Bhaskar Agarwal(Bhaska 대한치과이식임플란트학회 2022 The Korean Academy of Implant Dentistry Vol.41 No.3
Purpose: This in vivo study compared the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the mini-implant-supported overdenture and conventional implant-supported overdenture. The objectives of the study were to evaluate the pocket depth, crestal bone loss, and implant stability using a periotest and to measure patient satisfaction based on the oral health impact profile EDENT questionnaire in conventional and mini-implants supported overdentures. Materials and Methods: One hundred and seventy-four subjects above 40 years of age were recruited and randomized into two groups on a 1:1 basis: Group 1- mini-implant supported overdentures (2.5 mm diameter×11 mm length) and Group 2-conventional implant- supported overdentures (3.3 mm diameter×11 mm length). Crestal bone loss was measured from the baseline to 12 months and from 12 to 36 months. The pocket depth and implant stability using a Perio test device were measured at 12 months and 36 months. Finally, the patient satisfaction based on the oral health impact profile EDENT questionnaire in conventional and mini-implants supported overdentures was recorded. Results: There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in the pocket depth and crestal bone loss between the groups at 12 months and 36 months. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the perio-test values between the groups at 12 and 36 months. No significant (P>0.05) differences in physical pain, psychological discomfort, and disability were noted. Conclusions: Both conventional and mini-implant-supported overdentures have similar outcomes with respect to the pocket depth, crestal bone loss, implant stability, and overall quality of life of the patient.