***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: PURPOSE The aim of the present study was to evaluate implant survival , peri-implant conditions , and prosthodontic maintenance requirements for implant-supported m and ibular overdentures in atrophic m and ibles retained with ball or resilient telescopic crown attachments during a 3-year period . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Twenty-five patients with edentulous m and ibles each received 2 Camlog root-form dental implants in the m and ibular interforaminal ( canine ) region . The denture attachment system was chosen r and omly ; 13 patients received ball attachments and 12 patients received resilient telescopic crowns .  Implant survival , implant mobility ( Periotest values ) , and peri-implant conditions such as bone resorption , pocket depth , Plaque Index , Gingiva Index , Bleeding Index , and Calculus Index values were assessed for each implant . In addition , detailed prosthodontic maintenance was evaluated during the follow-up period and the 2 retention modalities were compared . RESULTS There were no differences in implant survival , implant mobility ( Periotest values ) , and peri-implant conditions between the 2 retention modalities . During the 3-year period significantly more complications/ interventions for maintenance purpose s were registered in the ball group ( 62 interventions ) than in the telescopic crown group ( 26 interventions ; P < .01 ) . CONCLUSION The results indicate that both ball attachments and resilient telescopic crowns used on isolated implants in the edentulous m and ible are viable treatment options . Implant success and peri-implant conditions did not differ between ball attachments and telescopic crowns used as retention modalities for implant overdentures , but the frequency of technical complications was significantly higher with ball attachments than with resilient telescopic crowns 
    Output:
    
The major biological complications affecting the tooth abutments were gingival inflammation , periodontal disease , and caries .
The most frequent technical complications were loss of cementation and loss of facings .
CONCLUSIONS The main findings of this review are : ( I ) double crown tooth abutments and dentures demonstrated a wide range of survival rates .
( II ) Implant-supported m and ibular overdentures demonstrated a favorable long-term prognosis . (