Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Jurnal Bridge 3
Jurnal Bridge 3
Jurnal Bridge 3
Journal of Case Reports in Dental Medicine (J Case Rep Dent Med) September 2020, Volume 2, Number 3: 57-59
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this case report is to restore healthy tooth to replace the old removable partial denture with fixed denture for maxillary
function with compromised tooth replacement so that patients are anterior teeth and also want to make a partial denture metal frames for
more confident and chew food well, a good choice of denture selection mandibular teeth.
methods are good for patients with loss of one anterior maxillary tooth Results: The case of loss of one maxillary anterior tooth was successful
with adhesive bridge denture treatment and choice of removable partial with the treatment of adhesive bridge dentures and the use of a removable
denture metal frames as an alternative solution to the replacement of partial denture metal frames a more stable and retentive mandibular
mandibular posterior teeth. posterior tooth loss that showed a better prognosis.
Methods: A 65 years old female patient came to Dental Hospital Hasanuddin Conclusion: Use of adhesive bridge dentures for maxillary anterior teeth
University with complaints of a loose maxillary partial denture complaining and and partial dentures metal frames for posterior mandibular teeth provides
difficulty chewing food because her posterior teeth had been removed +/- 7 satisfaction for patients because it can overcome aesthetic problems and
years ago and her anterior teeth were removed about +/- 5 years ago. Want improve good phonetic and masticatory functions.
-
Keywords: Adhesive bridge, RPD metal frames
Cite this Article: Dammar I, Ajmal A. 2020. An alternative approach to the replacement of missing teeth with adhesive bridges and unilateral
RPD metal frames: a case report. Journal of Case Reports in Dental Medicine. 2(3): 57-59. DOI: 10.20956/jcrdm.v2i3.133
© 2020 JCRDM. Published by Faculty of Dentistry, Hasanuddin University. All rights reserved. 57
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Discussion
This treatment method aims to restore healthy
tooth function so that patients can chew food
properly, minimally invasive dentistry has led
to the search for better preparation to reduce
unnecessary loss of tooth structure. Undoubtedly,
adhesive dentistry has paved the way for min-
imally invasive preparation; however, mechanical
retention, if possible adds to the long-term
success of the restoration. The Maryland Bridge
has been used for years and has undergone
various changes in design.5
Denture bridge treatment aims to restore
lost teeth. Indications for the treatment of
Figure 1 Intraoral View.
adhesive denture bridges are mild occlusion
contacts, young patients and good oral hygiene.
Resin bonded bridges (RBBs) are minimally
invasive fixed prostheses that rely on composite
resin cement for retention. 6 Okada and Inoue
demonstrated in 2008 that “ideal preparation is
not easy even for skilled dentists. As for intra oral
preparations in making artificial denture bridges
using parallel measurement methods, they will
save time and higher accuracy.7
Mechanical consideration of the preparation of
a supporting tooth is one of the factors to consider
Figure 2 Tooth preparation with parallelly technique and pin
hole besides the surface area and surface roughness
modification of the tooth preparation. Most importantly the
shape of the preparation design itself can provide
a retention and resistance to the release of a
restoration.8
This is supported by Kayser quoted by Ridwan
who said retention of cast metal crowns was
determined by several factors, namely the extent of
cemented tooth surface, slope of the preparation
wall, metal resistance and stiffness, cement used,
surface roughness of tooth preparation, retention
of adding pin contents, box and groove.9
Figure 3 Color selection with shade guide Removable partial dentures will continue to
be one of the main treatment options for patients
with partially edentulous. The advantage of
removable partial denture (RPD) metal frames
compared to conventional dentures including
strength and base can be made as thin as possible
and has the highest retentive strength.10
58 Journal of Case Reports in Dental Medicine (J Case Rep Dent Med) September 2020; 2(3): 57-59. DOI: 10.20956/jcrdm.v2i3.133
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Conflict of Interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
References
1. Replacement of Missing Anterior Tooth with Maryland
Bridge Dr. Pooja R Jaiswal, Dr. Surekha Godbole
Sharad pawar dental college sawangi (Meghe) Nagpur,
India Sch. J. Dent. Sci., 2017; 4(1):38-42 ).
Figure 5 Try In Adhesive bridge and Metalframe. 2. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J, Contemporary
fixed Prosthodontics. 4nd ed. St.Louis, Mosby Co,
2006.
3. Carr A, Brown D. McCracken’s Removable Partial
Prosthodontics. 13th ed. Elsevier; Saint Louis: 2017.
4. BonachelaWC,TellesD.Planning in Oral Rehabilitation
with Removable Partial Prosthesis. 1st ed. Sa o Paulo;
Santos: 1998.
5. Shimizu H, Kawaguchi T, Takahashi Y. The current status
of the design of resin-bonded fixed partial dentures, splints
and overcastings. Japanese Dental Science Review. 2014;
Figure 6 Final Result of Adhesif bridge 50: 23-28.
6. The glossary of prosthodontic terms No 7. J Prosthet dent.
1999,81:48-110.
7. Okada M, Inoue H. Introduction of parallel measurement
and supplementary apparatus newly developed. Prosthodont
Res Practice. 2008; 7: 243-245.
8. Edy Machmud, Moh. Dharmautama, Herawati. Pin hole
design affect shear bond strength of adhesive bridge. Journal
of Dentomaxillofacial Science Vol 9, No 1 (2010).
9. Ridwan IA. Pengaruh kekasaran permukaan preparasi
gigi terhadap retensi dari mahkota penuh logam cor yang
Figure 7 Final Result of RPD metal frame. disemen. Jurnal Kedokteran Gigi 1991; 11: 3-4.
10. Moh. Dharmautama, Edy Machmud, Asmah Fahmi Rasyid.
Effect of abutment selection to the clasp design of metal
frame. Journal of Dentomaxillofacial Science Vol 9, No 1
Conclusion (2010).
Aknowledgment
None .
Journal of Case Reports in Dental Medicine (J Case Rep Dent Med) September 2020; 2(3): 57-59. DOI: 10.20956/jcrdm.v2i3.133 59