BioHPP Hybrid Prosthesis Versus BioHPP Bar Implant Supported and Retained Overdenture Rehabilitating Edentulous Mandible
Condition: Marginal Bone Loss; Patient Satisfaction
MeSH terms: Mouth, Edentulous
Study type: Interventional

Summary: 
      The biggest challenge of oral rehabilitation is the replacement of lost structures and the
      restoration of their function and esthetics, focusing on matching a healthy tooth.

      Traditional complete dentures, implant (retained, supported) overdentures, and complete
      implant-supported fixed prostheses are all alternatives to the rehabilitation of the
      mandibular arch.

      The aim of this study was to compare BioHPP used as a skeletal substructure for hybrid
      (implant fixed, detachable) prostheses versus BioHPP bar supporting and retaining by using
      radiographic tracing to the marginal bone height changes around the implants, patient
      satisfaction can be improved.
    

Detailed description: 
      Fourteen completely edentulous male patients were selected from the out-patient clinic,
      Prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, according to certain
      criteria, and they were randomly allocated into two equal groups: group I: the seven patients
      were rehabilitated by the BioHpp hybrid prosthesis supported on four inter-foraminal
      implants; group II: While in group II, seven patients were rehabilitated by the BioHpp bar
      supported and retained overdenture.

      The upper and lower complete dentures were constructed following conventional methods, and
      the surgical guide was constructed according to dual-scan CBCT.

      the four parallel inter-foraminal implants were inserted in the mandible for each patient
      through used the surgical guide ( flapless technique ) After three months from the first
      surgery, the final prosthesis was constructed.

      For Group I; BioHpp fixed hybrid prosthesis, for Group II; BioHpp bar implant-supported and
      retained complete overdentures were created using digital workflow CAD/CAM.

      The crestal bone height loss was evaluated after six, twelve, and eighteen months from
      implant loading by using digital preapical radiography. Also, the patient's subjective
      evaluations by using a questionnaire based on the visual analog scale including five points
      (low dissatisfied, dissatisfied, fair, satisfied, highly satisfied) were evaluated for
      speech, chewing, comfort aesthetic, oral hygiene, and general satisfaction.

      A comparison between groups I and II was performed by using the Chi-square test, which
      revealed in the results that group II was significantly lower than group I at all intervals
      in the mesial and distal surfaces of anterior and posterior implants. Also, the results of
      the patient satisfaction revealed that, after 6 months, there was an insignificant difference
      between them as P > 0.05 in all except oral hygiene, as satisfaction was significantly higher
      in group II than in group I. While, after 12 months, there was an insignificant difference
      between them all (P > 0.05).
    

Intervention name(s): surgical ( implants placement)
Intervention type(s): Procedure
Intervention description(s): 4 implants were placed interforamen of the mandibular arch by using the surgical guide
Other intervention name(s): Final prosthesis was constructed on the 4 implants
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention model: Parallel Assignment
Intervention model description: to compare BioHPP used as a skeletal substructure for hybrid (implant fixed, detachable) prostheses versus BioHPP bar supporting and retaining by using radiographic tracing to the marginal bone height changes around the implants, patient satisfaction can be improved.
Masking: Single (Investigator)
Primary purpose: Other
Keywords: BioHpp; hybrid prosthesis; overdenture; bone loss