The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2011 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Retention Strength of Cobalt-Chromium vs Nickel-Chromium Titanium vs CP Titanium in a Cast Framework Association of Removable Partial Overdenture

Adriana Cristina Zavanelli, Recardo Alexandre Zavanelli, José Everaldo de Aquino Souza, Nelson Renato França Alves da Silva, Paulo Guilherme Coelho, Renata Cristina Silveira Rodrigues Ferracioli

Citation Information : Zavanelli AC, Zavanelli RA, de Aquino Souza JE, da Silva NR, Coelho PG, Ferracioli RC. Retention Strength of Cobalt-Chromium vs Nickel-Chromium Titanium vs CP Titanium in a Cast Framework Association of Removable Partial Overdenture. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011; 12 (3):179-186.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1031

Published Online: 01-06-2011

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2011; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

There is little information considering the framework association between cast clasps and attachments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the retention strength of frameworks match circumferential clasps and extra resilient attachment cast in three different alloys (cobalt-chromium, nickel-chromium titanium and commercially pure titanium), using two undercut (0.25 and 0.75 mm) and considering different period of time (0, 1/2, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years).

Methods

Using two metallic matrices, representing a partially edentulous mandibular right hemiarch with the first molar crown, canine root and without premolars, 60 frameworks were fabricated. Three groups (n = 20) of each metal were cast and each group was divided into two subgroups (n = 10), corresponding the molar undercut of 0.25 mm and 0.75 mm. The nylon male was positioned at the matrix and attached to the acrylic resin of the prosthetic base. The samples were subjected to an insertion and removal test under artificial saliva environment.

Results

The data were analyzed and compared with ANOVAs and Tukey's test at 95% of probability. The groups cast in cobaltchromium and nickel-chromium-titanium had the highest mean retention strength (5.58 N and 6.36 N respectively) without significant difference between them, but statistically different from the group cast in commercially pure titanium, which had the lowest mean retention strength in all the periods (3.46 N). The association frameworks using nickel-chromium- titanium and cobalt-chromium could be used with 0.25 mm and 0.75 mm of undercut, but the titanium samples seems to decrease the retention strength, mainly in the 0.75 mm undercut. The circumferential clasps cast in commercially pure titanium used in 0.75 mm undercuts have a potential risk of fractures, especially after the 2nd year of use.

Conclusion

This in vitro study showed that the framework association between cast clasp and an extra resilient attachment are suitable to the three metals evaluated, but strongly suggest extra care with commercially pure titanium in undercut of 0.75 mm.

Clinical significance

Frameworks fabricated in Cp Ti tend to decrease in retentive strength over time and have a potential risk of fracture in less than 0.75 mm of undercut.

How to cite this article

Souza JEdA, da Silva NRFA, Coelho PG, Zavanelli AC, Ferracioli RCSR, Zavanelli RA. Retention Strength of Cobalt-Chromium vs Nickel-Chromium Titanium vs CP Titanium in a Cast Framework Association of Removable Partial Overdenture. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(3):179-186.


PDF Share
  1. Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31(9):884-89.
  2. Comparison of titanium and cobalt-chromium removable partial denture clasps. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78(2):187-93.
  3. Radiographic changes in alveolar bone height on overdenture abutments: A longitudinal study. Gerodontology 2008; 25(2):118-223.
  4. Retention characteristics of attachment systems for implant overdentures. J Prosthodont 2004;13(4):221-26.
  5. The ERA implant-supported overdenture. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1995;16(5):512, 514,516; passim; quiz 522.
  6. Comparison of the retentive properties of six prefabricated postoverdenture attachment systems. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82(5):579-84.
  7. The decade of overdentures 1970-1980. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79(1):31-36.
  8. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(1):10-92.
  9. Surface roughness and fatigue performance of commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy after different polishing protocols. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93(4):378-85.
  10. Nonprecious alloys for use in fixed prosthodontics: A literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49(3):363-70.
  11. Comparison of cast Ti-Ni alloy clasp retention with conventional removable partial denture clasps. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91(4):374-82.
  12. Titanium framework removable partial denture used for patient allergic to other metals: A clinical report and literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73(1):4-7.
  13. Posterior implants for distal extension removable prostheses: A retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23(4):353-59.
  14. Titanium for removable dentures. I. Laboratory procedures. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24(5):338-41.
  15. Present status of titanium removable dentures—a review of the literature. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35(9):706-14.
  16. Overdentures on natural teeth: A new approach. Minerva Stomatol 2004;53(11-12):631-39.
  17. Base metal alloys used for dental restorations and implants. Dent Clin North Am 2007;51(3):603-27, vi.
  18. Retention force of T-bar clasps for titanium and cobalt-chromium removable partial dentures. Braz Dent J 2008;19(3):209-13.
  19. Comparative study of circumferential clasp retention force for titanium and cobalt-chromium removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88(3):290-96.
  20. Titanium for removable dentures. II. Two-year clinical observations. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24(6):414-18.
  21. Deflection fatigue of cobaltchromium, titanium, and gold alloy cast denture clasp. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74(4):412-19.
  22. A simple method for inspection of porosity in titanium castings. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70(3):275-76.
  23. Corrosion-fatigue of laser-repaired commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy under different test environments. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31(10):1029-34.
  24. Corrosion-fatigue life of commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloys in different storage environments. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84(3):274-79.
  25. When to choose which retention element to use for removable dental prostheses. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22(2):161-67.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.