The problem of the lower free-end removable partial denture

Neill, D. J.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(58)90048-9

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the clinical and histologic inflammation was more severe in the nonmetallic than in the metallic denture cases (Figs. [2][3][4][5].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This could be due to the presence of voids between the denture and the gingiva in which the tissue proliferates till it obliterates the space. 5,7,16 Fairchild 32 attributed inflammatory hyperplasia either to the behavior of denture materials during processing, to impression techniques or to improper use of impression materials. The increase in pocket depth in areas covered with relief was slightly greater than for those covered by denture base without relief.…”

Section: Metallic Denture Base Nonmetallic Ueniure Oase No Reliefmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gingival Response to Various Types of Removable Partial Dentures

Bissada

Ibrahim

Barsoum

1974

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ONE OF THE MAIN OBJECTIVES of prosthetic dentistry is to preserve the remaining periodontal tissues in a state of health. At the same time, periodontal health is necessary for the proper functioning of removable partial denture restorations. Thus, the prosthetic and periodontal treatment are not only interrelated but also interdependent.Various designs and several denture base materials are currently used in removable partial dentures. However, opinions vary regarding the effect of these dentures on the periodontal tissues of the remaining natural dentition. Some feel that the partial denture should cover the gingival margin, with or without relief; others advocate leaving the marginal gingiva completely uncovered in order to preserve and maintain the healthy status of the gingiva. The present investigation was conducted to seek a solution to such a prosthetic-periodontal problem. MATERIALS AND METHODSSixty-eight patients (36 males and 32 females) were selected from the prosthodontic clinic, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, on the basis of having two or more maxillary missing teeth. Their ages varied from 17 to 49 years. All patients were free of any apparent systemic disease. A medical and dental history, a dental and periodontal examination, periapical roentgenographs and maxillary and mandibular study casts were completed for each patient. Posterior free-end removable partial denture patients were not included.After the clinical examination and the survey of the study casts, a treatment plan was developed for construction of a removable partial denture. Appropriate procedures were carried out including oral prophylaxis, instructions in oral physiotherapy and preparation of occlusal rests. Impressions for the master casts were made one week after the mouth preparation procedures.Twenty-eight metallic (cobalt-chromium) and 40 nonmetallic (methylmethacrylate) partial denture bases were randomly constructed. In both the metallic and nonmetallic dentures the direct retainers used were cast metal clasps, with occlusal rests, bracing and retentive arms.In designing the denture, whether metallic or nonmetallic, three types of denture-gingiva relationship were outlined on the study casts according to the number and distribution of the remaining teeth. The three types treated on a random basis were:1. The palatal gingival margin of two or three teeth was kept covered by the palatal plate without doing any intentional relief on the study cast.2. The palatal gingival margin of another group of two or three teeth was covered completely by the palatal plate with a relief. Wax was used to block out gingival crevices, over which two thicknesses of 0.002 inch tinfoil were adapted and cemented on the master cast for a distance of 3-4 mm. from the gingival margin to secure the intended relief.3. The palatal gingival margin of a third group of two or three teeth was kept far away from the palatal plate. The distance between the gingival margin and the plate ranged between 5 and 6 mm.Either two or all three of the differen...

show abstract

“…However, the clinical and histologic inflammation was more severe in the nonmetallic than in the metallic denture cases (Figs. [2][3][4][5].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Metallic Denture Base Nonmetallic Ueniure Oase No Reliefmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gingival Response to Various Types of Removable Partial Dentures

Bissada

Ibrahim

Barsoum

1974

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, the mandibular FESRPD is considered to result in, relatively speaking, more bone loss in the edentulous saddle areas of the mandible vis-à-vis the maxilla, and thereby aggravates the potential for FESRPDs to rotate about the abutment teeth[161722]. Table 1 summarizes problems of FESRPDs.…”

Section: The Problem Of Free-end Saddle Removable Partial Denturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aforementioned problem assumes greater prominence in the mandible where the available area of non-tooth support is significantly more reduced than in the maxilla where the hard palate offers greater distribution of load. As a result, the mandibular FESRPD is considered to result in, relatively speaking, more bone loss in the edentulous saddle areas of the mandible vis-à-vis the maxilla, and thereby aggravates the potential for FESRPDs to rotate about the abutment teeth[ 16 17 22 ]. Table 1 summarizes problems of FESRPDs.…”

Section: The Problem Of Free-end Saddle Removable Partial Denturementioning

confidence: 99%

Reappraisal of the removable partial denture as a treatment option for the shortened dental arch

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For patients with shortened dental arches, many treatment options are available. The existing situation can be maintained by stabilizing the present dentition and improving the occlusion without extending the arch. Alternatively, the shortened dental arch can be extended by either a free-end saddle removable partial denture, cantilevered fixed bridge, or by an implant-supported prosthesis. The free-end saddle removable partial denture can be considered a simple, non-invasive, and relatively cheap treatment option for the shortened dental arch. It was believed that such prosthodontic rehabilitation would be beneficial for the patients in terms of improving oral functions. However, the existing literature indicates that the prognosis of free-end saddle removable partial denture is not predictable, it is problematic, and its contribution to oral functions in patients with shortened dental arches is considered to be dubious. This paper reviews and summarizes the current literature about the outcome of extending the shortened dental arch by a free-end saddle removable partial denture. It also outlines factors that may affect the prognosis of this prosthetic treatment.

show abstract

Mouth preparation for removable partial dentures

Glann

Appleby

1960

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of the lower free-end removable partial denture

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Gingival Response to Various Types of Removable Partial Dentures

Gingival Response to Various Types of Removable Partial Dentures

Reappraisal of the removable partial denture as a treatment option for the shortened dental arch

Mouth preparation for removable partial dentures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About