Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 6373410

Designing removable partial dentures.

Abstract

Various designs have been suggested for the more frequently- occurring situations of the partially edentulous state. Obviously, a discussion of all the probabilities of design is not possible. The important factor is that basic principles are not violated. Retainer choice, rest placement, major and minor connector design, and support of the distal extension base are all critical factors. However, the fact remains that adequate time must be spent in properly diagnosing the particular case and devising a workable treatment plan. A thorough oral and radiographic examination, accurate articulated diagnostic casts, and a profile of the patient in terms of prosthetic needs and expectations must all be made. Once this picture is in order, the rather mechanical task of laying out the "nuts and bolts" of removable partial denture design can be carried out to ensure that our patients receive the full benefits of our knowledge and skills.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R L DeFranco. 1984. Designing removable partial dentures.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373410/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effect of implant support on distal extension removable partial dentures: in vitro assessment.

The implants in implant-supported removable partial dentures (RPDs) are placed in the edentulous ridge to stabilize the RPD and minimize the resultant rotational movement. This study investigated the effect of implant placement on RPD stability. A model simulating a mandibular bilateral distal extension missing was fabricated using epoxy resin and silicone impression material as thin (1 mm) and thick (2 mm) soft tissues. Five pressure sensors (PS-10K, Kyowa, Tokyo, Japan) were attached near the left and right first molars (#36 and #46), first premolars (#34 and #44) and medio-lingual alveolar crest. Five bilateral distal extension RPDs with Co-Cr frameworks were conventionally fabricated. After the implants were placed at the bilateral second molar areas, healing caps (4.5 mm high) were connected to the denture base with autopolymerized resin to support the RPD. As in a conventional RPD, sealing screws were placed without connecting them. Loads up to 5 kg were applied, and the pressure and displacement of the RPDs (n = 5) were simultaneously measured and analysed using the Wilcoxen test (alpha = 0.05). There was less pressure on both thin and thick soft tissues, the #36, #46 and the medio-lingual alveolar crest from the implant-supported RPD than from the conventional RPD (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in pressure on #34 and #44 between the two RPDs (P > 0.05). There was significantly less denture displacement of the implant-supported RPD than of the conventional denture (P < 0.05). Implant support helped prevent the displacement of distal extension RPDs and decreased the pressure on soft tissues.

Denture Bases↗

[Development of a light-polymerized resin for the record base. Part 1 Comparison with autopolymerizing resin].

PURPOSE: The record block for maxillomandibular registration of the denture is absolutely necessary in order to decide the mandibular position. This record block must provide sufficient strength so as not to cause deformation in the oral cavity. It must also fit the alveolar ridge well in order to keep accurate registration. Since most of the conventional materials for this purpose are not sufficient, a new specific light-polymerized resin was experimentally developed for the record base. METHODS: The mechanical strength and suitability of the new material were examined in comparison with a conventional autopolymerizing resin. RESULTS: 1) The transverse strength was equivalent to that of the autopolymerizing resin. 2) Although the shear bond strength was equivalent to the autopolymerizing resin, the intensity was drastically improved by the application of composite primer. 3) The light-polymerized resin and the autopolymerizing resin did not show any difference in suitability, and it was a clinical value without problem. CONCLUSIONS: From these findings, it was confirmed that the new light-polymerized resin had the physical property for clinical application as a material for the record base.

Denture Bases↗