Effect of Using Different Primary Crown Materials on the Retention of CAD/CAM Telescopic Partial Dentures

Hebatallah Tarek Abdallah; Soha Elsaeid; Yasmine  Thabet

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2023.9410

Authors

Hebatallah Tarek Abdallah Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8280-4656
Soha Elsaeid Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7470-3276
Yasmine Thabet Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3244-0313

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2023.9410

Keywords:

Telescopic, Zirconia, chewing simulator, Retention

Abstract

AIM: This study compared the effect of using different primary crown materials (zirconia and cobalt-chromium) on the retention of telescopic retained removable partial dentures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary Kennedy class I stone model was prepared and scanned. The virtual cast was adjusted to create four abutments at the positions of the canines and the first premolars. Primary crowns were designed and then milled. In Group I, seven primary crowns were milled out of zirconia, and in Group II, seven primary crowns were milled from cobalt-chromium blanks. Cobalt-chromium telescopic partial dentures were milled. The universal testing machine was utilized to apply vertically dislodging static forces. Initial retention values were recorded. Then, the chewing simulator (CS) was used to apply dynamic cyclic loading to each partial denture. And after, 50,000 cycles and 270 attempts of insertion and removal final retention values were recorded. The data were collected and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS: A significant decrease in retention in both groups after simulation of 3 months of partial denture function was recorded. It was found that after simulation of 3 months of function Group I (zirconia) recorded a statistically significant higher mean value; (1.935 ± 0.268 N) than Group II; (0.583 ± 0.018 N) as indicated by student t-test (p ≤ 0.0001 < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Zirconia primary crowns attain higher retention values than cobalt-chromium with cobalt-chromium telescopic partial dentures after simulation of 3 months of function.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

Author Biography

Yasmine Thabet, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

Associate Professor, Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.

References

Jeyapalan V, Krishnan CS. Partial edentulism and its correlation to age, gender, socio-economic status and incidence of various kennedy’s classes-a literature review. J Clin Diag Res. 2015;9(6):ZE14-7. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/13776.6124 PMid:26266237

Vanzeveren C, D’Hoore W, Bercy P, Leloup G. Treatment with removable partial dentures: A longitudinal study. Part I. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(5):447-58. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01106.x PMid:12752923

Zlataric DK, Celebic A, Valentic-Peruzovic M, Jerolimov V, Pandurić J. A survey of treatment outcomes with removable partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(8):847-54. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01039.x PMid:12880410

Abuzar MA, Kahwagi E, Yamakawa T. Investigating oral health- related quality of life and self-perceived satisfaction with partial dentures. J Investig Clin Dent. 2012;3(2):109-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-1626.2012.00111.x PMid:22278959

Wismeijer D, Tawse-Smith A, Payne AG. Multicentre prospective evaluation of implant-assisted mandibular bilateral distal extension removable partial dentures: Patient satisfaction. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(1):20-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02367.x PMid:22111809

Wu JH, Yang YH, Wang CH, Lee HE, Du JK. Effects of denture maintenance on satisfaction levels of Taiwanese elderly using removable partial dentures: A pilot study. Gerodontology. 2012;29(2):e458-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2011.00500.x PMid:22117837

Constantin M, Forna DA, Budacu C, Caraiane A, Raftu G, Forna NC, et al. Oral Tumors having the origins in multiple tissues, non-differentiated or differentiated. Rev Chim. 2018;69:2895-8.

Cagna DR, Donovan TE, McKee JR, Eichmiller F, Metz JE, Albouy JP, et al. Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the committee on scientific investigation of the American academy of restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(3):198-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.010 PMid:31405523

Beech N, Robinson S, Porceddu S, Batstone M. Dental management of patients irradiated for head and neck cancer. Aust Dent J. 2014;59(1):20-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12134 PMid:24495127

Gupta SH, Viswambaran M, Vijayakumar R. Telescopic retainers for removable partial dentures. Med J Armed Forces India. 2015;71(Suppl 2):578-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2015.05.001 PMid:26858498

Dobrzański LA, Dobrzański LB. Dentistry 4.0 concept in the design and manufacturing of prosthetic dental restorations. Processes. 2020;8(5):525. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8050525

Hofmann E, Behr M, Handel G. Frequency and costs of technical failures of clasp-and double crown-retained removable partial dentures. Clin Oral Investig. 2002;6(2):104-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-002-0160-9 PMid:12166709

Schwindling FS, Dittmann B, Rammelsberg P. Double-crown- retained removable dental prostheses: A retrospective study of survival and complications. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(3):488-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.02.017 PMid:24831747

Eitner S, Schlegel A, Emeka N, Holst S, Will J, Hamel J. Comparing bar and double-crown attachments in implant- retained prosthetic reconstruction: A follow-up investigation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(5):530-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01500.x PMid:18371100

Szentpétery V, Lautenschläger C, Setz JM. Longevity of frictional telescopic crowns in the severely reduced dentition: 3-year results of a longitudinal prospective clinical study. Quintessence Int. 2010;41(9):749-58. PMid:20806099

Dabrowa T, Dobrowolska A, Wieleba W. The role of friction in the mechanism of retaining the partial removable dentures with double crown system. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2013;15(4):43-8. PMid:24479667

Arnold C, Hey J, Setz JM, Boeckler AF, Schweyen R. Retention force of removable partial dentures with different double crowns. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22(4):1641-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00784-017-2224-x} PMid:29101546

Yi YJ, Cho LR, Park CJ. Cause of technical failures of conical crown-retained denture (CCRD): A clinical report. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2003;41:714-9.

Bayer S, Zuziak W, Kraus D, Keilig L, Stark H, Enkling N. Conical crowns with electroplated gold copings: retention force changes caused by wear and combined off-axial load. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(3):323-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02003.x PMid:20868454

Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Naumann M. Parameters affecting retentive force of electroformed double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14(2):129-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0271-7 PMid:19343381

Miyazaki T, Nakamura T, Matsumura H, Ban S, Kobayashi T. Current status of zirconia restoration. J Prosthodont Res. 2013;57(4):236-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2013.09.001 PMid:24140561

Merk S, Wagner C, Stock V, Eichberger M, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, et al. Suitability of secondary PEEK telescopic crowns on zirconia primary crowns: The influence of fabrication method and taper. Materials (Basel). 2016;9(11):908. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9110908 PMid:28774027

Wagner C, Stock V, Merk S, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Eichberger M, et al. Retention load of telescopic crowns with different taper angles between cobalt‐chromium and polyetheretherketone made with three different manufacturing processes examined by pull-off test. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(2):162-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12482 PMid:27037795

Bathala L, Majeti V, Rachuri N, Singh N, Gedela S. The role of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) in dentistry-a review. J Med Life.

;12(1):5-9. https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2019-0003 PMid:31123518

Guttal SS, Nadiger RK, Abhichandani S. Effect of insertion and removal of tooth supported overdentures on retention strength and fatigue resistance of two commercially available attachment systems. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2012;2(2):47-51. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1047

AlHelal A, AlRumaih HS, Kattadiyil MT, Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ. Comparison of retention between maxillary milled and conventional denture bases: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(2):233-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.08.007 PMid:27765399

Stock V, Schmidlin PR, Merk S, Wagner C, Roos M, Eichberger M, et al. PEEK primary crowns with cobalt-chromium, zirconia and galvanic secondary crowns with different tapers-a comparison of retention forces. Materials (Basel). 2016;9(3):187-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9030187 PMid:28773311

Stock V, Wagner C, Merk S, Roos M, Schmidlin PR, Eichberger M, et al. Retention force of differently fabricated telescopic PEEK crowns with different tapers. J Dent Mater. 2016;35(4):594-600. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2015-249 PMid:27477224

Bayer S, Stark H, Mues S, Keilig L, Schrader A, Enkling N. Retention force measurement of telescopic crowns. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14(5):607-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0315-z PMid:19609574

Petropoulos VC, Smith W. Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17(4):526-35. PMid:12182295

Scherer MD, McGlumphy EA, Seghi RR, Campagni WV. Comparison of retention and stability of implant-retained overdentures based upon implant number and distribution. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28(6):1619-28. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3067 PMid:24278931

Uludag B, Polat S, Sahin V, Çomut AA. Effects of implant angulations and attachment configurations on the retentive forces of locator attachment-retained overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(5):1053-7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3401 PMid:25216129

Uludag B, Polat S. Retention characteristics of different attachment systems of mandibular overdentures retained by two or three implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27(6):1509-13. PMid:23189303

Wöstmann B, Balkenhol M, Weber A, Ferger P, Rehmann P. Long-term analysis of telescopic crown retained removable partial dentures: Survival and need for maintenance. J Dent. 2007;35(1):939-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2007.09.010 PMid:17961902

Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98(5):389-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0022-3913(07)60124-3 PMid:18021828

Fontijn-Tekampl FA, Slagter AP, van’t Hof MA, Geertman ME, Kalk W. Bite forces with mandibular implant- retained overdentures. J Dent Res. 1998;77(10):1832-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345980770101101 PMid:9786640

Tehini G, Baba Z, Berberi A, Majzoub Z, Bassal H, Rifai K. Effect of simulated mastication on the retention of locator attachments for implant-supported overdentures: An in vitro pilot study. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(1):74-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12670 PMid:28913855

Sia P, Masri R, Driscoll CF, Romberg E. Effect of locator abutment height on the retentive values of pink locator attachments: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(2):283-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.08.012 PMid:27765392

Bayer S, Steinheuser D, Grüner M, Keilig L, Enkling N, Stark H, et al. Comparative study of four retentive anchor systems for implant supported overdentures--retention force changes. Gerodontology. 2009;26(4):268-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2009.00286.x PMid:19371390

Botega DM, Mesquita MF, Henriques GE, Vaz LG. Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems. J Oral Rehabil. 2004;31(9):884-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01308.x PMid:15369470

Stančić I, Jelenković A. Retention of telescopic denture in elderly patients with maximum partially edentulous arch. Gerodontology. 2008;25(3):162-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2007.00204.x PMid:18194328

Engels J, Schubert O, Güth JF, Hoffmann M, Jauernig C, Erdelt K, et al. Wear behavior of different double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(2):503-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0746-9 PMid:22573245

Ghazal M, Yang B, Ludwig K, Kern M. Two-body wear of resin and ceramic denture teeth in comparison to human enamel. Dent Mater. 2008;24(4):502-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.04.012 PMid:17688934

Fischer CA, Ghergic DL, Vranceanu DM, Ilas SA, Comaneanu RM, Baciu F, et al. Assessment of force retention between milled metallic and ceramic telescopic crowns with different taper angles used for oral rehabilitation. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(21):4814. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13214814 PMid:33126581

Merk S, Wagner C, Stock V, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Eichberger M, et al. Retention load values of telescopic crowns made of Y-TZP and CoCr with Y-TZP secondary crowns: Impact of different taper angles. Materials (Basel). 2016;9(5):354. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9050354 PMid:28773477

Besimo CH, Graber G, Flühler M. Retention force changes in implant-supported titanium telescope crowns over long-term

use in vitro. J Oral Rehabil. 1996;23(6):372-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1996.tb00866.x PMid:8809690

Kawilarang KC, Kusuma HA, Indrastuti M. The retention difference between cobalt chromium and zirconia coping in different angulations on telescopic overdenture. Maj Kedokt Gigi Indones. 2020;6(3):117-22. https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.44383

Bevington PR, Robinson DK. Data Reduction and Error Analysis. 3rd ed. NewYork: McGrow-Hill; 2003.

Ramadan R, Elsherbeeny Y, Thabet Y, Kandil B, Ghali R. Retention of a telescopic overdenture on customized abutments after the simulation of 1 year in function. Dent Med Probl. 2021;58(2):201-6. https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/127963 PMid:33915039