Maxillary Three-Implant Overdentures Opposing Mandibular Two-Implant Overdentures: 10-Year Prosthodontic Outcomes.

PURPOSE This study aimed to evaluate the 10-year prosthodontic outcomes with splinted and unsplinted designs for maxillary overdentures on three implants opposing mandibular two-implant overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using two similar implant systems, 40 edentulous participants with existing mandibular two-implant overdentures were randomly allocated to two prosthodontic treatment groups (splinted design with bar units; unsplinted design with ball attachments). Participants had three narrow-diameter implants placed in their edentulous maxillae using a one-stage surgical procedure, and they were conventionally loaded with overdentures. Prosthodontic maintenance events were documented at 1-, 2-, 5-, 7-, and 10-year recalls. RESULTS Progressive attrition of the cohort resulted in 36 participants being seen for the 1-year recall, 31 participants for the 2-year recall, 30 participants for the 3-year recall, 28 participants for the 5-year recall, 26 participants for the 7-year recall, and 23 participants (nearly 60%) for the 10-year recall. Data showed no significant differences in prosthodontic maintenance or success associated with patrices, matrices, or other aspects of the overdentures using the different attachment systems and designs. CONCLUSION Maxillary three-implant overdentures are a viable treatment option for edentulous patients wearing opposing mandibular two-implant overdentures. There were no differences in prosthodontic maintenance and success between the splinted (bar) and unsplinted (ball) designs.