الفهرس 
Table of contents
Implant- assisted complete overdentureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 183 |  |  |
| | | from | 183 | | |
Abstract
The aim of this work was clinical and radiographic comparison between bar locator versus bar/ball attachment for implant assisted complete mandibular overdenture. Materials and methods : Ten complete edentulous patients were chosen for this study divided into two groups : group I: Five patients received bar locator attachment. group II: Five patients received bar/ball attachment. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were done at four observation periods T0 : Immediately after overdenture insertion, T6 : Six months after overdenture insertion ,T12: twelve months after overdenture insertion and T18 : eighteen months after overdenture insertion. Clinical evaluations and Radiographic evaluations were done. Results : There was a statistically insignificant difference between group I and group II in the plaque index, bleeding index, gingival index and probing depth. There was a statistically insignificant difference between group I and group II in vertical marginal bone loss and posterior ridge resorption at 6, 12 months .There was a statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss between group I and group II at 18 months as the bar locator increase marginal bone loss more than bar ball. There was a statistically significant difference in posterior ridge resorption between group I and group II at 18 months as the bar ball increase posterior ridge resorption more than bar locator. Conclusion : from clinical point of view, the bar-locator and bar ball were the same. The two groups represent plaque accumulation and some gingival inflammation. from radiographic point of view, the marginal bone loss in bar locator was more than bar- ball and posterior ridge resorption in bar- ball was more than bar-locator.