Retention and marginal bone loss in attachment systems for implant retained overdentures
Surabhi Duggal, Sahba Hassan, Khadija Anwaar, Yogesh Garg, Shailesh Jain

TL;DR
This study compares how well different attachment systems work for implant-retained overdentures, focusing on retention and bone loss.
Contribution
The study provides a direct comparison of ball, bar, and locator attachment systems in terms of retention and bone preservation.
Findings
The bar system showed the highest retention among the three attachment systems.
The bar system also outperformed others in preserving marginal bone and patient satisfaction.
Abstract
Comparison of retention and marginal bone loss of ball, bar and locator attachment systems for implant retained overdentures it is of interest. Hence, related data were collected from 75 patients. Retention was highest for the bar system, while the locator and ball systems exhibited moderate and significant reductions. The bar attachment system outperformed ball and locator systems in retention, marginal bone preservation and patient satisfaction, making it the most effective option for implant-retained overdentures.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental materials and restorations · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
