Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Feb 28:2022:6947756.
doi: 10.1155/2022/6947756. eCollection 2022.

Novel PEEK Retentive Elements versus Conventional Retentive Elements in Mandibular Overdentures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

M Y Sharaf  1 , Asharaf Eskander  2 , Mohamed Afify Afify  2
Affiliations

Novel PEEK Retentive Elements versus Conventional Retentive Elements in Mandibular Overdentures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

M Y Sharaf et al. Int J Dent. .

Abstract

Background: Many patients suffer from lack of retention of conventional mandibular overdentures due to loss of clip retention over time. Computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) milled polyether ether ketone (PEEK) materials may be used for the construction of retentive housing and clips for improving retention of implant-supported overdentures.

Objective: To compare retention and patient satisfaction of implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained by conventional nylon clip and metal housings for ball attachments versus PEEK clip and housings.

Methods: Twenty-two participants were divided into 2 equal groups (n = 11). The conventional group received implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained by metal housings and nylon retentive elements, while the PEEK group received implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained by PEEK retentive elements and housings. The PEEK retentive elements were made using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM). The evaluation included measuring the retention by applying a gradual pulling up force by force meter and patient satisfaction with a 7-point visual analog scale (VAS) at overdenture insertion and 3, 6, and 12 months subsequently by a research interviewer.

Results: The PEEK group showed statistically significantly increased retention force (P < 0.05) at the time of insertion (37.6/17.79) and after 3 months (33.9/16.78), 6 months (32.7/15.97), and 12 months (31.65/13.05). The conventional group had a statistically significantly higher mean overall satisfaction (P < 0.05) at the time of insertion (65/82.18). No statistically significant difference was found after 3 months (87.81/84.72). The PEEK group showed statistically significantly higher mean overall satisfaction (P < 0.05) after 6 months (86.36/80.18) and 12 months (85.45/79.54).

Conclusions: According to the results of this study, the PEEK retentive material provided more retention than did the conventional material and led to improved patient satisfaction. The study was registered at clinical trials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05079048).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Checking parallelism between implants by the parallel pins.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scanned image of ball abutment analog.
Figure 3
Figure 3
PEEK cap and ball abutment design.
Figure 4
Figure 4
PEEK cap adapted to ball abutment.
Figure 5
Figure 5
PEEK inserts attached to the ball abutment.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Fitting surface with picked up PEEK housing.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Fitting surface with picked up metal housing.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Flow diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ElKerdawy M. W., Radi I. A. W. Effect of dislodging forces on mandibular implant attachment-retained overdenture. Implant Dentistry . 2011;20(3):246–254. doi: 10.1097/id.0b013e318211fe1b. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Büttel A. E., Lüthy H., Sendi P., Marinello C. P. Wear of ceramic and titanium ball attachments in subjects with an implant-retained overdenture: a controlled clinical trial. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry . 2012;107:109–113. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60035-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fcinc J. S., Hehade A. C., Duncan W. J., et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures: mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Gerodontology . 2002;19(1):3–4. - PubMed
    1. Nissan J., Oz-Ari B., Gross O., Ghelfan O., Chaushu G. Long-term prosthetic aftercare of direct vs. indirect attachment incorporation techniques to mandibular implant-supported overdenture. Clinical Oral Implants Research . 2011;22(6):627–630. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02026.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yaseen A., Mohammed K. A. Comparison of two attachments retaining mandibular immediately loaded two implant overdentures. Cairo Dental Journal . 2012;28:1–7.

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources