Designing anterior cantilever resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses based on finite element analysis

Purpose: A resin-bonded bridge (RBB) is a minimally invasive prosthetic treatment option for intact adjacent teeth. However, it is contentious as to whether the mesial or distal adjacent tooth should be used as an abutment. This study aimed to investigate the potential of finite element analysis (FE...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Prosthodontic Research 2022, Vol.67(3), pp.418-423
Hauptverfasser: Kihara, Takuya, Shigeta, Yuko, Ikawa, Tomoko, Sasaki, Keita, Shigemoto, Shuji, Ogawa, Takumi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose: A resin-bonded bridge (RBB) is a minimally invasive prosthetic treatment option for intact adjacent teeth. However, it is contentious as to whether the mesial or distal adjacent tooth should be used as an abutment. This study aimed to investigate the potential of finite element analysis (FEA) for the selection of abutment teeth and the determination of the optimal design for anterior cantilever RBBs.Methods: Three types of RBBs were designed to simulate loss of the maxillary left lateral incisor. The fixed-fixed RBB (FF-RBB) had one retainer each for the left central incisor and canine. Distal- and mesial-cantilever RBBs (D-CRBB and M-CRBB) had a single retainer on the central incisor and canine, respectively. Three-dimensional models for FEA were generated from computed tomography slices and dental casts. FEA was performed for each RBB to evaluate stresses in the intercuspal, protrusive, and lateral mandibular positions.Results: The maximum principal stresses on the bridges in the intercuspal position were 141.9 MPa, 93.6 MPa, and 45.7 MPa, for the FF-RBB, D-CRBB, and M-CRBB, respectively. The stress in the D-CRBB position was greater than in the M-CRBB position in the intercuspal, protrusive, and lateral mandibular positions.Conclusions: Based on the results, M-CRBB on the canine had a higher clinical performance than D-CRBB on the central incisor. FEA was useful for determining the optimal design of RBB for each patient.
ISSN:1883-1958
1883-9207
2212-4632
DOI:10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00103