الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 169 |  |  |
| | | from | 169 | | |
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate clinically (pocket depth, gingival index and patient satisfaction) and radio graphically (Crestal bone level and bone density) the supporting structures around four mini implant retained mandibular over dentures utilizing three different denture base materials during one year follow up period.
Twenty four male patients were selected from those attending the out-patient clinic, Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Minia University to participate in this study. Patients were precisely selected and thoroughly examined in an attempt to eliminate any factor that might adversely affect the results of this study.
Patients were rehabilitated by mucosa supported maxillary complete denture and implant retained mandibular over denture. Standard clinical and laboratory techniques were followed for denture construction for all patients. Patients participating in this study were randomly divided into three equal groups.
group I: Patients rehabilitated with mini dental implants retained over denture with conventional acrylic denture base.
group II: Patients rehabilitated with mini dental implants retained over denture with hard thermoplastic denture base Polyan IC (PMMA)
group III: Patients rehabilitated with mini dental implants retained over denture with semi flexible thermoplastic denture base (bre flex 2nd edition)
No implant failure was detected throughout the whole study, the mini implants were assessed clinically and radiographically throughout the study period by observing the absence of any signs of inflammation or infection.
Analysis of the clinical and radiographic results of this study reflected that the semi flexible thermoplastic denture base group is the least one in regard to all the parameters and this difference was statistically significant in pocket depth results, patient satisfaction values, bone loss and density around the mini implants at different time intervals while gingival index values was not statistically significant throughout the study period.