Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 29, 2026
Measuring Maxillary Posterior Tooth Movement: A Model Assessment using Palatal and Dental Superimposition
Published on: February 23, 2024
Comparison of 2 retentive systems for implant-supported overdentures: soft tissue management and evaluation of
Cuneyt Karabuda1, Tosun Tosun, Evren Ermis
1Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Istanbul, Turkey. zcuneyt@hotmail.com
Background:
The aim of the present study was to compare the peri-implant soft tissue health status of implants supporting overdentures with bar attachments or ball attachments in the mandible, as well as patient satisfaction with these attachment types.
Methods:
The study included a Dolder bar group with 18 cases (43 implants) and a ball attachment group with 18 cases (51 implants). The mean function period in the Dolder bar group was 49 months (range: 12 to 72 months) and in the ball attachment group, the mean was 23 months (range: 12 to 40 months). Implants were clinically evaluated by using a modified plaque index (mPI), modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI), and probing depths. Patient satisfaction with the treatment was recorded using a questionnaire.
Results:
mPI, probing depth, and mSBI did not statistically differ between groups (Mann-Whitney U test, P > 0.05). Patient satisfaction was similar with both retentive systems.
Conclusion:
Within the limits of this study, we concluded that there was no significant difference between the 2 attachment types used for implant-supported overdentures with respect to the soft tissue health status or patient satisfaction.