bridgework Flashcards
tx options for missing tooth/teeth
no tx - leave space
replace
close space - ortho
reasons for txing
aesthetics
fct
speech
maintenance of dental health
replacement options
denture
bridgework
implants
definition
a prosthesis which replaces a missing tooth/teeth and is attached to one or more natural teeth/implants
- fixed partial denture
- compared with a RPD which replaces ST and bone
adhesive or conventional
general indications
fct and stability appearance speech psychological reasons systemic disease e.g. epileptics - small RPD aspiration risk co-operative pt
local indications
big teeth heavily restored teeth - conventional destructive favourable abutment angulations favourable occlusions
general contraindications
uncooperative pt MH contraindications poor OH high caries rate PDD large pulps (conventional)
local contraindications
high possibility of further tooth loss within arch - look long term - dentures/implants
poor abutment prognosis
length of span too great
ridge form and tissue loss
- if teeth been missing for long time unlikely to get good aesthetics - bridges don’t replace ST, dentures better
tilting and rotation
degree of restoration (how much tooth is left after prep)
PA status
PD status (bone loss)
abutment
a tooth which serves as an attachment for a bridge
pontic
artificial tooth which is suspended from the abutments
retainers
the EC or IC Rxs that are connected to the pontic and cemented to the prepared abutment tooth
connectors
component which connects the pontic to the retainer(s)
edentulous span
space between natural teeth that is to be filled with bridge/RPD
saddle
area of the edentulous ridge over which the pontic will lie
pier
abutment tooth which stands between and is supporting 2 pontics, each pontic being attached to a further abutment (rare)
unit
retainer/pontic
tooth preparations
conventional - not as common anymore - retainer(s) = crown - F-F, F-C, F-M RR/adhesive - retainer(s) = metal (NiCr or CoCr) - minimal/no prep
bridge designs
fixed fixed - conventional or adhesive/RR cantilever - conventional or adhesive/RR fixed-moveable hybrid spring cantilever
fixed fixed bridge
retainer at each end, pontic in middle, joined by rigid connectors
advantages of fixed fixed bridges
robust max retention and strength abutments splinted together - perio mobile cases can use in longer spans lab construction straightforward
disadvantages of fixed fixed bridges
prep difficult (parallel)
prep must be minimally tapered
common PofI for abutments
removal of tooth tissue (pulp)
cantilever bridge
support for pontic at one end only
may be connected to one or more retainers
no retainer at other end of pontic
advantages of cantilever bridges
conservative vs FF - only one tooth
lab construction straightforward
no need to ensure multiple tooth preps are parallel
disadvantages of cantilever bridges
short span only (not as robust)
rigid to avoid distortion (fracture risk?)
mesial cantilever preferred
- abutment distal to pontic
fixed moveable bridge
has a rigid connector usually at distal end of pontic and a moveable connector mesially
- allows some vertical movement at the mesial abutment
potential solution when abutments aren’t parallel
bridge in 2 parts
- slot and dovetail
- slot in (this bit flexes a little)
- have 2 PofIs
advantages of fixed moveable bridge
preps don't require a common PofI each prep designed to be retentive independent of others more conservative of tooth allows minor tooth movement may be cemented in 2 parts
disadvantages of fixed moveable bridge
length of span limited
lab construction complicated
possible difficulty cleaning beneath moveable joint-plaque trap
can’t construct provisional
hybrid
1 retainer = conventional prep
other retainer = min prep
spring cantilever
one pontic attached to the end of a metal arm that runs across the palate to a rigid connector on the palatal side of a retainer
v rare
advantages of a spring cantilever
useful if spacing between upper incisors
where adjacent teeth are unrestored
where a posterior tooth would provide a suitable abutment i.e. already has crown/large direct Rx
disadvantages of a spring cantilever
can only use to replace U incisors
difficult to clean beneath palatal connector
may irritate palatal mucosa
- candida infections
difficult to control movement of pontic, due to springiness of metal arm and displacement of palatal STs - v flexible
abutment evaluation
must be able to withstand forces prev directed to missing tooth/teeth (remaining tooth structure)
tissues healthy and free of inflammation i.e. PA and PDD
crown to root ratio
- length of tooth coronal to alv crest compared to length of root embedded in bone
- optimum 2:3, min 1:1
get radiographs
as a rule of thumb how long do bridges last if well maintained and looked after?
around 10 years
why do you need to have a plan for retrievability/back up plan?
will fail at some point
how should you examine the occlusion?
IO
study casts - Facebow mounted on semi-adjustable articulator
what should you examine in regards to occlusion?
canine guidance/group fct - dynamic occ relationships
opposing tooth over-erupted?
will bridge interfere with current occlusion?
signs of parafct present?
- wear facets, attrition etc
designing and planning thoughts
min or conventional prep?
material? - metal stronger, ceramic aesthetic
abutment evaluation
cleansability - will fail if OH not easily performed, manual dexterity
appearance/aesthetics - confirm pts expectations are achievable
evaluating potential abutments
root configuration
angulation/rotation of abutment
PD health
surface area for bonding and quality of E
risk of pulpal damage
quality of endo - re-RCT?
remaining tooth structure present? - at least 2-3mm height
core - remove and rebuild? - but if need post and core risk of root fracture
details of bridge design
select abutments
- judge longevity of adjacent teeth
select retainer
- no/min/regular prep? RBBs
- complete crown? conventional
select pontic and connector
plan occlusion
- avoid having contact on just pontic. Need contact on just retainer or on pontic and retainer
prescribe material
pontic fct
restore appearance of missing tooth
stabilise occlusion
- prevent tilting and overeruption
improve masticatory function
3 considerations for pontic design
cleansability
appearance
strength
considerations for pontic design - cleansability
smooth, with highly polished or glazed surface
surface shouldn’t harbour join of metal and porcelain (if metal ceramic design used)
embrasure space smooth and cleansable
considerations for pontic design - appearance
anteriorly - tooth like as possible
posteriorly - may compromise
considerations for pontic design - strength
longer span = greater thickness required to withstand occlusal forces (because flex increases fracture risk)