FINISH LINES

DR.MEENAKSHI AKSHAYALINGAM,MDS,
PROFESSOR AND HEAD OF THE DEPT,
PROSTHODONTICS.
◾ Closely adapted margins to finish lines
of survival of restoration in the oral environment

◾ Configuration of finish line-

 dictates the shape and bulk of metal at the margins
 affects the marginal adaptation
 affects degree of seating
 Margin Placement

• Whenever possible, the margin of the

preparation should be supragingival

• Subgingival margins often

lead to the periodontal disease
Supragingival Margin: coronal to the gingival

crest.

Equi gingival margin at the gingival crest

Subgingival Margin apical to the free gingival

margin.

JPD 1990; 64: 636-42.

 Advantages of supragingival margins

• They can be easily finished.

• They are more easily kept clean.

• Impressions are more easily made .

• Less potential to soft tissue damage.

• Restorations can be easily evaluated at recall appointments.

INDICATION OF SUBGINGIVAL MARGIN
• Caries, erosion, restoration extending subgingivally

• Additional retention is desired

• Short clinical crowns

• Esthetics

• Root sensitivity

• Modification of axial contour is indicated

◾ Chamfer
◾ Heavy chamfer
◾ Shoulder
◾ Sloped shoulder
◾ Radial shoulder
◾ Shoulder with a bevel
◾ Knife edge
◾ Indications-
 Cast metal crowns
 Metal-only portion of PFM crowns

◾ Distinct, easily identified

◾ Least stress

◾ Round end tapered diamond

 Half the tip of the diamond
  Indicated for all-ceramic crowns
◾ 90 degree cavosurface angle with a large radius rounded
internal angle
◾ Round end tapered diamond
◾ Better than conventional chamfer but not shoulder
◾ Bevel added - to use with metal restoration
  All-ceramic crowns
 Facial margin of PFM crowns

◾ Wide ledge-
 resistance to occlusal forces
 minimizes stresses which leads to fracture of porcelain

◾ Flat-end tapered bur

◾ Healthy contours
◾ Maximum esthetics
◾ Destruction of more tooth structure

Sharp 90° internal line angle

concentrates stress on tooth Coronal

fracture

◾ Not used for cast metal restorations

◾ 120° sloped shoulder margin
◾ Facial margin of a metal-ceramic crown
◾ No unsupported enamel, yet sufficient bulk to allow
thinning of the metal framework to a knife-edge for
acceptable esthetics
◾ Modified shoulder
◾ Cavosurface 90°
◾ Shoulder width lessened with rounded internal angles
◾ Lesser stress concentration
◾ Good support for porcelain
◾ Indications:
 Proximal box of inlays, onlays
 Occlusal shoulder of onlays and mandibular ¾ crowns
 Facial finish line of metal-ceramic restorations (gingival
esthetics not critical)
 Situations where a shoulder is already present
(destruction by caries, previous restorations)
◾ Bevel:
 allows the cast metal margin to be bent or burnished
against the prepared tooth structure
 minimizes the marginal discrepancy
 removes unsupported enamel
◾ Permit acute margin of metal
◾ Axial reduction may fade out
◾ Thin margin - difficult to wax and cast
◾ Susceptible to distortion
◾ Indications:
 Mandibular posterior teeth with very convex axial
surfaces
 Lingually tilted lower molars
Chisel Edge

• Advantage: Conservation of tooth structure.

• Disadvantage: Location of margin is difficult

thus produces overcontouring

• Indication: Occasionally on the tilted tooth,

Not acceptable
◾ All metal crowns –
 Chamfer depth: 0.3-0.5 mm
 Axial surface reduction: 0.5 -0.8 mm
 Occlusal reduction: 1- 1.5 mm

◾ Metal ceramic crowns –

 Finish line depth: 1-1.5 mm
 Occlusal reduction: 2mm

◾ All ceramic crowns–

 Finish line and facial reduction depth: 1mm
 Incisal/occlusal reduction: 2mm

Goodacre C J. Designing tooth preparations for optimal success.

Dent Clin N Am 2004; 48: 359-85.
◾ Uniformly reduced :
 normal crown form
 improved aesthetic

◾ Makes easier for laboratory technician to create

esthetic restorations

◾ Best achieved by placing depth grooves

Goodacre C J. Designing tooth preparations for optimal success.

Dent Clin N Am 2004; 48: 359-85.
◾ Should be rounded (increases crown strength)

◾ Sharp line angles – stress concentration

◾ Facilitates laboratory fabrication and fit

◾ Ease to pour impressions

Goodacre C J. Designing tooth preparations for optimal success.

Dent Clin N Am 2004; 48: 359-85.
Recent methods of Tooth preparation?

Ultrasonic
Laser
Robotic
Thank you!!!