Comparison of Three Types of Stud Attachments on Retention and Strain Energy in the Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdentures


  •   Gholamreza Esfahanizadeh

  •   Saeed Mohammadi-Asl

  •   Parvaneh Lavasani Navai


Background: The present in vitro study assessed he effects of three different Stud attachments on the retention and strain energy in the mandibular implant-supported overdentures.

Methods: Two parallel implants (Implantium System) were placed on the mandibular canines’ regions and a chrome-cobalt casting framework was prepared as the denture base. The implant fixtures were installed on the canine location and the pulling was performed by three orthodontic wires in the Instron machine with a speed of 0.5 min/mm. Dislodging forces were applied to the housings in two vertical and oblique directions on three different Stud attachments (Ball, Kerator, Positioner). All three wires were connected to the device in the vertical position while one wire was separated from the molar’s region in the oblique loadings. The retention of these three attachments was statistically analyzed by means of one-way analysis of variance.

Results: Significant differences were found between the attachments (F (2, 15) =33.01, p<0.0001). Furthermore, Retention forces in the oblique loadings were significant differences between the attachments (F(2,15)=175.10, p<0.0001). The effect size, calculated using eta squared, was 0.95, which is considered large. The strain energy was 4.08, 3.05 and 1.04 J for the Ball, Positioner and Kerator attachments in the vertical loadings and 4.05, 1.44 and 3.07 J in the oblique loading respectively.

Conclusion: The retentive forces and strain energy of ball attachments were greatest than other studied attachments in the vertical and oblique loadings. 

Keywords: Stud attachments, Retention force, Strain energy, Overdenture


Sivaramakrishnan, G. and K. Sridharan, Comparison of implant supported mandibular overdentures and conventional dentures on quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. Aust Dent J, 2016. 61(4): p. 482-488.

Critchlow, S.B. and J.S. Ellis, Prognostic indicators for conventional complete denture therapy: a review of the literature. J Dent, 2010. 38(1): p. 2-9.

da Fontoura Frasca, L.C., et al., Evaluation of retention forces and resistance to fatigue of attachment systems for overdentures: plastic and metal components. Implant Dent, 2014. 23(4): p. 451-5. A. Cichocki and R. Unbehaven, Neural Networks for Optimization and Signal Processing, 1st ed. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 1993, ch. 2, pp. 45-47.

Thomason, J.M., et al., Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients--the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J, 2009. 207(4): p. 185-6.

Muller, F., et al., Knowledge and attitude of elderly persons towards dental implants. Gerodontology, 2012. 29(2): p. e914-23.

Awad, M.A., et al., The effect of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on oral health–related quality of life: an international multicentre study. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2014. 25(1): p. 46-51.

Hasan, I., et al., Changes in biting forces with implant-supported overdenture in the lower jaw: A comparison between conventional and mini implants in a pilot study. Annals of Anatomy - Anatomischer Anzeiger, 2016. 208: p. 116-122.

Adell, R., et al., A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. International Journal of Oral Surgery, 1981. 10(6): p. 387-416.

Petropoulos, V.C. and F.K. Mante, Comparison of retention and strain energies of stud attachments for implant overdentures. J Prosthodont, 2011. 20(4): p. 286-93.

Mensor, M.C., Jr., Attachment fixation for overdentures. Part I. J Prosthet Dent, 1977. 37(4): p. 366-73.

Daou, E.E., Stud attachments for the mandibular implant-retained overdentures: Prosthetic complications. A literature review. The Saudi Dental Journal, 2013. 25(2): p. 53-60.

Gozneli, R., et al., Retention behaviors of different attachment systems: precious versus nonprecious, precision versus semi-precision. Dent Mater J, 2013. 32(5): p. 801-7.

Seo, Y.H., et al., Clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures via Locator implant attachment and Locator bar attachment. J Adv Prosthodont, 2016. 8(4): p. 313-20.

Trakas, T., et al., Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent, 2006. 15(1): p. 24-34.

Leem, H.-W., et al., A study on the changes in attractive force of magnetic attachments for overdenture. J Adv Prosthodont, 2016. 8(1): p. 9-15.

Boeckler, A.F., et al., Corrosion of dental magnet attachments for removable prostheses on teeth and implants. J Prosthodont, 2009. 18(4): p. 301-8.

Takada, Y., N. Takahashi, and O. Okuno, Corrosion characteristics of magnetic assemblies composing dental magnetic attachments, in Interface Oral Health Science 2007: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium for Interface Oral Health Science, Held in Sendai, Japan, Between 18 and 19 February, 2007, M. Watanabe, et al., Editors. 2007, Springer Japan: Tokyo. p. 343-344.

Scherer, M.D., et al., Comparison of retention and stability of two implant-retained overdentures based on implant location. J Prosthet Dent, 2014. 112(3): p. 515-21.

Bergendal, T. and B. Engquist, Implant-supported overdentures: a longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1998. 13(2): p. 253-62.

Abi Nader, S., et al., Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures. J Oral Rehabil, 2011. 38(3): p. 157-64.

Cehreli, M.C., et al., Systematic review of prosthetic maintenance requirements for implant-supported overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010. 25(1): p. 163-80.

Karabuda, C., M. Yaltirik, and M. Bayraktar, A clinical comparison of prosthetic complications of implant-supported overdentures with different attachment systems. Implant Dent, 2008. 17(1): p. 74-81.

Anas El-Wegoud, M., et al., Bar versus ball attachments for implant-supported overdentures in complete edentulism: A systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018. 20(2): p. 243-250.

Branchi, R., et al., Resistance to wear of four matrices with ball attachments for implant overdentures: a fatigue study. J Prosthodont, 2010. 19(8): p. 614-9.

Sadowsky, S.J., Treatment considerations for maxillary implant overdentures: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent, 2007. 97(6): p. 340-8.

Stoker, G.T., D. Wismeijer, and M.A. van Waas, An eight-year follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of aftercare and cost-analysis with three types of mandibular implant-retained overdentures. J Dent Res, 2007. 86(3): p. 276-80.

Petropoulos, V.C. and W. Smith, Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2002. 17(4): p. 526-35.

Chung, K.-H., et al., Retention Characteristics of Attachment Systems for Implant Overdentures. Journal of Prosthodontics, 2004. 13(4): p. 221-226.

Rutkunas, V., H. Mizutani, and H. Takahashi, Evaluation of stable retentive properties of overdenture attachments. Stomatologija, 2005. 7(4): p. 115-20.

Evtimovska, E., et al., The change in retentive values of locator attachments and hader clips over time. J Prosthodont, 2009. 18(6): p. 479-83.

Burns, D.R., et al., Prospective clinical evaluation of mandibular implant overdentures: Part I--Retention, stability, and tissue response. J Prosthet Dent, 1995. 73(4): p. 354-63.

Kutkut, A., et al., A systematic review of studies comparing conventional complete denture and implant retained overdenture. J Prosthodont Res, 2018. 62(1): p. 1-9.

Goodacre, C.J., et al., Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent, 2003. 90(2): p. 121-32.

Stephens, G.J., et al., The influence of interimplant divergence on the retention characteristics of locator attachments, a laboratory study. J Prosthodont, 2014. 23(6): p. 467-75.

Kim, S.-M., et al., Comparison of changes in retentive force of three stud attachments for implant overdentures. J Adv Prosthodont, 2015. 7(4): p. 303-311.

Cune, M., et al., Patient satisfaction and preference with magnet, bar-clip, and ball-socket retained mandibular implant overdentures: a cross-over clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont, 2005. 18(2): p. 99-105.

Petropoulos, V.C., W. Smith, and E. Kousvelari, Comparison of retention and release periods for implant overdenture attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1997. 12(2): p. 176-85.

Feine, J.S., 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): p. 3-4.

Renner, R.P., The overdenture concept. Dent Clin North Am, 1990. 34(4): p. 593-606.

Sultana, N., D.W. Bartlett, and M. Suleiman, Retention of implant-supported overdentures at different implant angulations: comparing Locator and ball attachments. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017.

Tehini, G., et al., Effect of Simulated Mastication on the Retention of Locator Attachments for Implant-Supported Overdentures: An In Vitro Pilot Study. J Prosthodont, 2017.

Alsabeeha, N., et al., Attachment systems for mandibular single-implant overdentures: an in vitro retention force investigation on different designs. Int J Prosthodont, 2010. 23(2): p. 160-6.

Uludag, B. and S. Polat, Retention characteristics of different attachment systems of mandibular overdentures retained by two or three implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2012. 27(6): p. 1509-13.

Yoo, J.S., et al., Stress analysis of mandibular implant overdenture with locator and bar/clip attachment: Comparative study with differences in the denture base length. J Adv Prosthodont, 2017. 9(3): p. 143-151.

Doukas, D., et al., The influence of interimplant distance and attachment type on the retention characteristics of mandibular overdentures on 2 implants: 6-month fatigue retention values. Int J Prosthodont, 2008. 21(2): p. 152-4.

Chung, K.H., et al., Retentive characteristics of overdenture attachments during repeated dislodging and cyclic loading. Int J Prosthodont, 2011. 24(2): p. 127-9.

EM Saboori A., Esfahanizade GH.R Comparison of stresses transferred to the implant supported overdentures with bar, ball and zaag attachments through photoelasticity. JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC Dental Association OF Iran 17 (4), 66 To 7.

G Esfahanizadeh, A Shams, R Ghoseiri., The effects of implant-macro design on stress quantity and distribution around three types of fixtures by photo-elastic analysis. Journal of Dental Medicine 2019. 24 (2): p. 77-86.


How to Cite
Esfahanizadeh, G., Mohammadi-Asl, S., & Navai, P. L. (2020). Comparison of Three Types of Stud Attachments on Retention and Strain Energy in the Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdentures. European Journal of Dental and Oral Health, 1(6).