Bilateral Distal Extension Removable Partial Overdenture Retained by O-ring Attachment
Objectives: Thepurpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of the spacer on reducing the stresses transmitted to abutment teeth retaining a RPOD for mandibular bilateral distal extension case using O-ring attachment. Methods: Two designs were tested according to use of spacer between denture base and abutment teeth during picking up the O-ring attachment as follows: Design І used without a spacer. Design ІІ same as design one but used with spacer between the denture base and the abutment teeth The two designs were loaded 10 times with a controlled vertical static load of 60 N for 15 seconds unilaterally and bilaterally, micro strains were recorded from three surfaces (distal, buccal, and lingual) of the abutment teeth. Results: 1- The stresses were significantly reduced for the second design in which a spacer was used in both loading positions on the loaded and unloaded side.
2- The lateral forces were markedly directed toward the buccal side more than lingual side in both designs regardless of using the spacer. Conclusions: 1- It is very important to use spacer with resilient attachments retaining a partial overdenture in order to minimize the forces exerted on the abutment teeth. 2-Most of the lateral forces were directed to the buccal side of the abutment teeth. Recommendations:- -Periodic monitoring of the buccal side of the abutment teeth when using a resilient attachment. -Further investigation is needed to evaluate the stresses directed to the residual ridge of with or without spacer
IADR/AADR/CADR General Session
2015 IADR/AADR/CADR General Session (Boston, Massachusetts) Boston, Massachusetts
2015 2435 Prosthodontics Research
Sultan, Mohamed
( Faculty of Dentistr Mansoura Uni.
, Toronto
, Ontario
, Canada
; Faculty of Dentistry University of Toronto
, Toronto
, Ontario
, Canada
)
Almotayam, Hassan
( Faculty of Dentistr Mansoura Uni.
, Toronto
, Ontario
, Canada
)
Mean micro-strains for the three surfaces (distal, buccal, and lingual) of the abutment’s roots (n=30) after application of bilateral (central) static load (60 N) in the two designs
Design І
Design ІІ
t
P
(X¯)
SD
(X¯)
SD
251.70
170.66
60.667
62.643
5.755
<0.001***
X¯= Arithmetic mean
SD= standard deviation
t = tabulated t-value
Singnificant when (p<0.001*)
mean micro-strains for the three surfaces (distal, buccal, and lingual) of the abutment’s roots (n=30) after application of unilateral static load (60 N) in the two designs in the loaded side
Design І
Design ІІ
t
P
(X¯)
SD
(X¯)
SD
287.70
186.41
77.663
66.219
7.182
<0.001***
X¯= Arithmetic mean
SD= standard deviation
t = tabulated t-value
Singnificant when (p<0.001*)
mean micro-strains for the three surfaces (distal, buccal, and lingual) of the abutment’s roots (n=30) after application of unilateral static load (60 N) in the two designs in the unloaded side
Design І
Design ІІ
t
P
(X¯)
SD
(X¯)
SD
14.367
8.923
10.200
8.872
6.549
<0.001***
X¯= Arithmetic mean
SD= standard deviation
t = tabulated t-value
Singnificant when (p<0.001*)