We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 2     17. Mar. 2017
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 2  (17.03.2017)

Page 363-371, doi:10.11607/jomi.5291, PubMed:28291854

Load Transfer Characteristics of Three-Implant-Retained Overdentures with Different Interimplant Distances
Tokar, Emre / Uludag, Bulent / Karacaer, Ozgul
Purpose: Implant-retained overdentures are the first choice of rehabilitation for edentulous mandibles. Bone morphology and anatomical landmarks may be influenced by the location and angulation of implants and distances between the implants. The purpose of this study was to investigate stress distribution characteristics and to compare stress levels of three different attachment designs of three-implant-retained mandibular overdentures with three different interimplant distances.
Materials and Methods: Three photoelastic mandibular models with three implants were fabricated using an edentulous mandible cast with moderate residual ridge resorption. The center implants were embedded parallel to the midline, and the distal implants were aligned at a 20-degree angulation corresponding to the center implants. Distances between the center and distal implants were set at 11, 18, and 25 mm at the photoelastic models. Bar, bar-ball, and Locator attachment-retained overdentures were prepared for the models. Vertical loads were applied to the overdentures, and stress levels and distribution were evaluated by a circular polariscope.
Results: The greatest observed stress level was moderate for the tested overdenture designs. The Locator attachment system showed the lowest stress level for the 11-mm and 25-mm photoelastic models. The bar attachment design transmitted less stress compared with the other tested designs for the 18-mm photoelastic model.
Conclusion: Stresses were observed on the loaded side of the photoelastic models. The lowest stress was found with the Locator and bar attachments for the 11-mm photoelastic model, which transmitted little or no discernible stress around the implants.

Keywords: implant-retained overdenture, photoelastic stress analysis, precision attachment