Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2016; 10(04): 566-570
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.195180
Case Report
Dental Investigation Society

Distal extension mandibular removable partial denture with implant support

Canan Bural
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkiye
,
Begum Buzbas
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkiye
,
Sebnem Ozatik
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkiye
,
Gulsen Bayraktar
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkiye
,
Yusuf Emes
2   Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkiye
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
24 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

This case report describes the fabrication of a distal extension removable partial denture (RPD) of a 65-year-old man with implant support. Loss of fibroelasticity of the peripheral tissues and reduced mandibular vestibular sulcular depth due to a previous surgical resection and radiotherapy at the right side were the main clinical factors that created difficulty for denture retention and stability. The fabrication of a mandibular RPD supported by anterior teeth and two bilaterally placed implants in the molar area to convert from Kennedy Class 1 design to Kennedy Class 3 implant-bounded RPD is reported. Retention and stability of the denture were improved with implant support on the distal extension site of the RPD. The common clinical problems about distally extended RPDs are lack of retention and stability due to the movement around the rotational axis. Dental implant placement to the distal edentulous site minimizes the potential dislodgement of the RPD is popular. Implant-supported RPD can be suggested as an advantageous and cost-effective treatment option for the partially edentulous patients.

Key words:

Dental implant - distal-extension removable partial denture - implant-supported removable partial denture - Kennedy Class I partial edentulous - locator attachment
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Gonçalves TM, Campos CH, Garcia RC. Implant retention and support for distal extension partial removable dental prostheses: Satisfaction outcomes. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 334-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Zancopé K, Abrão GM, Karam FK, Neves FD. Placement of a distal implant to convert a mandibular removable Kennedy class I to an implant-supported partial removable Class III dental prosthesis: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 113: 528-33.e3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bortolini S, Natali A, Franchi M, Coggiola A, Consolo U. Implant-retained removable partial dentures: An 8-year retrospective study. J Prosthodont 2011; 20: 168-72
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Ohkubo C, Kobayashi M, Suzuki Y, Hosoi T. Effect of implant support on distal-extension removable partial dentures: In vivo assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 1095-101
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Mitrani R, Brudvik JS, Phillips KM. Posterior implants for distal extension removable prostheses: A retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003; 23: 353-9
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kono K, Kurihara D, Suzuki Y, Ohkubo C. Pressure distribution of implant-supported removable partial dentures with stress-breaking attachments. J Prosthodont Res 2014; 58: 115-20
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Keltjens HM, Kayser AF, Hertel R, Battistuzzi PG. Distal extension removable partial dentures supported by implants and residual teeth: Considerations and case reports. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993; 8: 208-13
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Elsyad MA, Habib AA. Implant-supported versus implant-retained distal extension mandibular partial overdentures and residual ridge resorption: A 5-year retrospective radiographic study in men. Int J Prosthodont 2011; 24: 306-13
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Mijiritsky E, Karas S. Removable partial denture design involving teeth and implants as an alternative to unsuccessful fixed implant therapy: A case report. Implant Dent 2004; 13: 218-22
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Verri FR, Pellizzer EP, Rocha EP, Pereira JA. Influence of length and diameter of implants associated with distal extension removable partial dentures. Implant Dent 2007; 16: 270-80
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Griffin TJ, Cheung WS. The use of short, wide implants in posterior areas with reduced bone height: A retrospective investigation. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 139-44
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 de Freitas RF, de Carvalho DiasK, da Fonte PortoCarreiro A, Barbosa GA, Ferreira MA. Mandibular implant-supported removable partial denture with distal extension: A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2012; 39: 791-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Cunha LD, Pellizzer EP, Verri FR, Falcón-Antenucci RM, Goiato MC. Influence of ridge inclination and implant localization on the association of mandibular Kennedy class I removable partial denture. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22: 871-5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Krekmanov L, Kahn M, Rangert B, Lindström H. Tilting of posterior mandibular and maxillary implants for improved prosthesis support. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15: 405-14
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Bilhan H. The role of the dental implant in removable partial dentures. In: Sakar O. editor. Removable Partial Dentures: A Practitioners’ Manual. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Switzerland; 2016: p. 195-208
    Search in Google Scholar