OR Foundation
  • About
    • Oral Reconstruction Foundation
      • Purpose and Mission
      • Foundation Board
      • Scientific Working Group
      • Education Working Group
      • History
      • Career
      • News
  • Granting
    • Requirements
    • Application
  • Publications
    • Grant Publications
    • Consensus Publications
  • Awards
    • Research Award
      • Awards 2018/2019
      • Award 2016/2017
      • Award 2014/2015
      • Award 2012/2013
      • Award 2010/2011
      • Award 2008/2009
    • Poster Competition
      • Competition 2018
      • Competition 2016
      • Competition 2014
      • Competition 2012
  • Education
    • International Symposia
    • Global Symposia
    • National Symposia
    • Curriculum
    • Education Courses
    • Webinars
  • Contact
Select Page

Full-arch removable vs fixed implant restorations: A literature review of factors to consider regarding treatment choice and decision-making in elderly patients.


Vazouras K, Taylor T.

Int J Prosthodont. 2021 Suppl;34:s93-s101

Abstract

Objective:

To review and analyze the literature regarding removable vs fixed implant prosthetic treatment for complete edentulism in elderly people..

Material and methods:

A narrative review of published articles was conducted. Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies comparing removable vs fixed implant modalities for edentulous patients and/or reporting on specific outcomes for fixed vs removable implant restorations in elderly patients.

Results:

It is evident that there are differences in mechanical and biologic maintenance needs due to differences in prosthetic materials and designs for fixed vs removable implant restorations. Anatomical restrictions, age-related problems, lifestyle, cost, maintenance needs, access to dental services, and past experience (both of the provider and the patient) all play a role in prosthesis selection for these patients. Patient expectations and their financial means will define their choices. Patient-reported outcome measures are not standardized, and any assumptions made based on different studies need to be carefully evaluated.

Conclusion:

The decision-making pathway for determining what type of implant-supported prosthesis is preferable for edentulous patients is complicated by many variables that must be considered when treatment planning for maximum benefit for the patient. Detailed explanations of potential outcomes, complications, difficulties, and benefits of therapeutic options is mandatory. Proper assessment of patients' expectations and desires before treatment is critical for a successful outcome.

SOURCE

Latest Research Award Winners

Dr. Yifan Zhang
Quantitative Clinical Adjustment Analysis of Posterior Single Implant Crown in a Chairside Digital Workflow: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2019;30:1059-1066

Read more

Dr. Hyun-Chang Lim
Tissue integration of zirconia and titanium implants with and without buccal dehiscence defects — A histologic and radiographic preclinical study. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2019;30:660-9

Read more

Dr. Lorenzo Tavelli
Acellular dermal matrix and coronally advanced flap or tunnel technique in the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions. A 12-year follow-up from a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2019;46:937-48

Read more

Dr. Lukasz Witek
Repair of critical-sized long bone defects using dipyridamole-augmented 3D-printed bioactive ceramic scaffolds. J Orthop Res. 2019;37:2499-507

Read more

Oral Reconstruction Foundation


Margarethenstrasse 38 

4053 Basel
Switzerland

Phone: +41 61 565 41 51
Email: info@orfoundation.org

OR Foundation – U.S. Section

2300 Riverchase Center
Birmingham, AL 35244
USA
Phone: +1 205 986 7989
Email: info.us@orfoundation.org

Newsletter

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS

© Oral Reconstruction Foundation 2023 | Imprint | Disclaimer | Privacy | Sitemap | Professional websites Basel