Patient-reported outcome measures and clinical performance of implant-retained mandibular overdentures with stud and ball attachments: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Published:August 03, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.02.006
Abstract
Statement of problem
Evidence regarding the retention system for a mandibular overdenture is important
for treatment planning. However, the clinical performance of stud and ball attachments
for mandibular overdenture retainers is unclear.
Purpose
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical
performance and self-reported patient outcomes of ball and stud attachments as mandibular
overdenture retainers.
Material and methods
Randomized (RCTs) and nonrandomized (N-RCTs) controlled clinical trials were selected
based on the eligibility criteria. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane
Collaboration Tools, and the certainty of the evidence (COE) by using the grades of
recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) workshop approach.
Meta-analyses according to the follow-up period were performed for implant survival,
prosthetic maintenance and complications, bleeding on probing (BoP), marginal bone
loss (MBL), satisfaction, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).
Results
Thirteen RCTs and 4 N-RCTs were included. Twelve studies presented a high risk of
bias. The stud demonstrated a lower risk ratio (RR) (P<.001) for maintenance and complications concerning the need for matrix activation
(RR 7.12 [2.65, 19.15]) (very low COE) and new overdentures (RR 2.47 [1.02, 5.96])
(moderate COE), ranging from 1 to 5 years of follow-up. Mean difference (MD) for MBL
after 1 (MD 0.40 [0.28, 0.52]; P<.001) and 5 years (MD 0.18 [0.16, 0.20]; P<.001) was higher for ball attachments than that for stud (very low COE) attachments.
Stud attachments also improved satisfaction (P<.001) when compared with ball attachments (very low COE). Implant survival rate (high
COE), BoP (very low COE), and OHRQoL (low COE) were similar for the attachments.
Conclusions
Stud and ball attachments are clinically appropriate options as mandibular overdenture
retainers and are capable of restoring OHRQoL. Nevertheless, the stud showed greater
improvement in satisfaction and less prosthetic aftercare and MBL.
Comments