Bridgework 3 Flashcards
alternatives to bridgework
no restoration
denture(s)
implant(s)
holistic tx planning
- Look at the whole mouth
- Not only at a specific tooth
- Plan for retrievability (always have a back-up plan)
- All restorations will eventually fail
- What will be options? Replace like for like? More destructive resort?
- What will the dentition be like in 10-years?
longevity of RBB
80% over 5-10years
longevity of cantilever bridge
80% over 5-10years
longevity of fixed-fixed over 5-10years
90%
collect information when gathering pt history in regards to bridge planning
- History
- Presenting complaint
- Medical and social history
- Past dental history
- attendance, OH
- Clinical examination (Extra- and intra-oral)
- Soft tissues
- Periodontal
- Caries risk assessment
- Occlusion
- Parafunction
- Abutment evaluation
- Remaining tooth structure
- Special tests
- Radiographs
occlusal information for bridgework planning
- Examine:
- Intra-orally
- Study casts
- Facebow-mounted on semi-adjustable articulator
- Incisal classification (ortho lectures)
- Canine-guided or group function?
- Opposing tooth over-erupted?
- Reducing interocclusal space
- Will bridge interfere with current occlusion?
- Will it be changed when bridge placed?
- Signs of parafunction present?
- Wear facets, attrition etc.
- Bruxism – risk of destroying bridge when placed
- Wear facets, attrition etc.

evaluation of potential abutments when designing and planning bridges (8)
- Root configuration
- Big or multi rooted best
- Angulation/rotation of abutment
- Periodontal health
- Surface area for bonding & quality of enamel
- Risk of pulpal damage
- Quality of endodontics:
- Remaining tooth structure present?
- Core
- Remove and rebuild?

options for bridge design (3 main groups with subgroups)
- Resin-bonded/Resin-retained/Adhesive
- Cantilever
- Fixed-fixed
- “Conventional”
- Cantilever
- Fixed-fixed
- Fixed-moveable
- Hybrid
- Spring Cantilever Bridge

Pontic design
5
- Wash-through pontic
- Dome/Bullet/Torpedo
- Modified ridge lap
- Total ridge lap
- Ovate pontic

3 functions of pontic
- restore appearance of missing tooth
- stabilise occlusion
- improve masticatory function
3 considerations for pontic design
cleansability
appearance
strength
cleansability in pontic design
- Should always be smooth, with highly polished or glazed surface
- Surface should not harbour join of metal and porcelain (if metal-ceramic design used)
- Shearing off due to occlusal force
- Embrasure space smooth and cleansable
appaerance for pontic design
anteriorly - as ‘tooth like’ as possible
posteriorly - may compromise
strength for pontic design
longer the span - greater the thickness required to withstand occlusal forces
4 surfaces of pontic
- Occlusal surface
- Resemble surface of tooth it replaces
- Narrower if possible to enable cleaning
- Should have sufficient occlusal contact so can function
- Need driven down long axis of tooth
- Approximal surface
- Connector: strength (roughly 2 by 2 mm for strength)
- Embrasure: space – floss/interdental, but want to try and reduce for aesthetic
- Buccal & lingual surface
- Ridge surface
wash through pontic design
no contact with soft tissue
fucntional rather than for appearance
consider in lower molar area
easy to clean

a.k. hygienic or sanitary
dome shaped pontic design
useful in lower incisor, premolar or upper molar areas
acceptable if occlusal 2/3 of buccal surface visible - poor aesthetics if gingival 1/3 of tooth visible
good for cleaning

a.k.a torpedo or bullet shaped
modified ridge lap pontic design
buccal surface looks as much like tooth as possible
lingual surface cut away
line contact with buccal of ridge
problems with food packing on lingual surface of ridge

ridge lap/saddle pontic design
greatest contact with soft tissue
if designed carefully: can be cleansed
less food packing than ridge-lap
care taken not to displace soft tissue or cause blanching of tissue

ovate pontic design
good for OH good pt
and want optimal aesthetics
presses on gingivae, looks like natural tooth piercing out of ginivae
materials for conventional bridges
- All metal
- Gold
- Nickel/Cobalt chromium?
- Stainless steal
- Metal ceramic
- All ceramic – more likely to #, but starting to rival MC
-
Zirconia – very strong, but less aesthetic than lithium disilicate
- E.g. LAVATM and Procera®
-
Lithium disilicate
- e.g. - E.max
-
Zirconia – very strong, but less aesthetic than lithium disilicate
-
Ceromeric (porcelain with composite), less used
- BelleGlass™
- Vectris®
- Targis® Vectris®
common place for all metal bridges
lower posterior area (gold)
metal ceramic bridges usually
make up the majority of bridges made in UK currently




