28 Chapter 2 Overdenture survival rate A decision was made not to replace two of the participants’ implants because they did not experience any loss of retention. The two and three implants that were lost by two other participants were replaced, as were their overdentures. One additional participant’s (bar group) overdenture was replaced due to wear, resulting in an overdenture survival rate of 95.0% for the bar group and 91.3% for the solitary attachment group, which means the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.591, Log-Rank test, Fig. 2.5). Figure 2.5 | Kaplan Meier curve of overdenture survival. Probing depth change and clinical indices The mean PDC at the 5-year follow-up was +0.6±1.1mm for the solitary attachment group and +0.7±0.9mm for the bar group. The median plaque, calculus, gingival condition and bleeding indices scores are depicted in Table 2.2; there were no significant differences between the groups. Biological and technical complications Peri-implant mucositis occurred in 47.8% and 15.0% of the solitary attachment and bar groups’ participants, respectively. Peri-implantitis occurred in 25.8% and 5.1% of the solitary attachment and bar groups’ participants, respectively (Table 2.3). The calculated incidence rates include the treated and lost implants. Technical complications consisted of the replacement of attachment matrices (n=4), retightening of an abutment screw (n=1, solitary attachment group), tooth fracture repair (n=2, solitary attachment group) and prosthesis base fracture repair (n=1, bar group).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw