Share Page:

Volume 20 , Issue 6
November/December 2005

Pages 923–929

Clinical Outcome and Prosthodontic Compensation of Tilted Interforaminal Implants for Mandibular Overdentures

Gerald Krennmair, MD, DMD, PhD/Rudolf Fürhauser, MD, DMD / Martin Krainhöfner, MD, DMD / Michael Weinländer, MD, DMD / Eva Piehslinger, MD, DMD, PhD

PMID: 16392350

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sagittal inclination of interforaminal implants, the clinical implant outcome, and the necessary extent of prosthodontic compensation modalities for implant overdentures (IODs). Materials and Methods: Lateral cephalometric radiographs of 62 patients, each with a mandibular IOD retained by 2 to 4 implants, were analyzed. The sagittal inclination of the longitudinal implant axis of the most anterior implant was analyzed relative to the mandibular and occlusal planes. The angle needed to compensate for the inclination of the mandibular implant to obtain Angle’s class I for the prosthesis (the compensation angle) was measured and compared with respect to skeletal class. Peri-implant structures were measured using the Plaque Index and the Gingival Index. The compensation angle was correlated with the mandibular implant inclination, the degree of mandibular atrophy, and the anterior facial height. Results: The most anterior mandibular implants showed a mean retroinclination of 74.3 ± 9.3 degrees in relation to the mandibular plane; retroinclination was significantly more pronounced in skeletal class II than skeletal classes I and III (P < .05). The compensation angle (26.9 ± 10.5 degrees) was more significant for skeletal class II than for skeletal classes I and III (P < .01). Sagittal mandibular implant inclination correlated significantly to the compensation angle (r = –0.46; P < .05), mandibular atrophy (r = 0.32; P < .05) and mandibular facial height (r = –0.45; P < .05). Implant survival rate and peri-implant parameters (bone loss, pocket-depth, Plaque and Gingival Indices) of the interforaminal implants were not shown to be influenced by implant retroinclination. Nine patients (2 skeletal class 1, 7 skeletal class II) reported phonetic problems with the IOD because of narrowing of the lingual space but described significant improvement after a median 4.7 months (range, 3 to 12 months). Discussion and Conclusion: Depending on skeletal class, prosthetic compensatory mechanisms will be operative in the presence of mandibular implant retroinclination for IOD. Knowledge of mandibular inclinations and the compensatory mechanisms may be an essential factor in successful prosthetic rehabilitation and may provide for a homogenous design of the bar construction and easier handling and may also reduce stress on the attachment mechanism. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:923–929
Key words: interforaminal implants, mandibular overdentures, prosthodontic compensation

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us