Effects of interimplant distance and cyclic dislodgement on retention of Locator and ball attachments: An in vitro study

Reyhane Salehi | Sayed Shojaedin Shayehg | William M. Johnston | Seyed Mohammad Reza Hakimaneh

---

URL :   http://research.shahed.ac.ir/WSR/WebPages/Report/PaperView.aspx?PaperID=116482
Date :  2019/04/25
Publish in :    The Journal Of Prosthetic Dentistry
DOI :  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.12.023
Link :  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391319300782
Keywords :retention, Locator

Abstract :

---

Statement of problem. Evaluation of the long-term retentive behavior of overdenture attachments is necessary for successful treatment. Interimplant distance (IID) could affect the retention of these attachments. Purpose. The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the effects of IID and cyclic dislodgement on the retention of Locator and ball attachments. Material and methods. Ball and Locator attachments were connected to corresponding implant analogs. Metal housings were connected to each attachment. Thirty-six pairs of acrylic resin blocks were fabricated for 3 IIDs (19, 23, and 29 mm) and 2 attachments (n=6). Each pair consisted of 2 attachment assemblies parallel to each other with a specified IID. Overall, 1440 dislodgement cycles were applied by using a universal testing machine, and the maximum dislodging force was recorded after 0, 120, 360, 720, and 1440 cycles. Dislodging force data were analyzed by using repeated-measures 3-way analysis of variance, with the number of cycles as the within-subject factor for each specimen. Bonferroni-corrected Student t tests were used to resolve effects that were statistically significant. Moreover, dislodging force data were fit into an exponential decay model to determine the extent and rate of force decay for each attachment and IID studied. Results. The initial retention of Locator attachments was significantly higher than that of ball attachments with IIDs of 23 and 29 mm, but no significant difference was noted with the 19-mm IID. After 1440 cycles, the retention was statistically similar with that of the 23-mm IID but was significantly higher for ball attachments with IIDs of 19 and 29 mm. Conclusions. The IID is one of the factors that affect the retention of ball and Locator attachments. The mean retention of both attachments was sufficient for all 3 IIDs at insertion and after 1440 cycles. (J Prosthet Dent 2019;-:---)