The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 4 ( April, 2019 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

The Fit Accuracy of Removable Partial Denture Metal Frameworks Using Conventional and 3D Printed Techniques: An In Vitro Study

Salwa O Bajunaid, Bashaer Altwaim, Muneera Alhassan, Rawan Alammari

Keywords : Fit accuracy, Laboratory research, Lost-wax technique, Removable partial denture framework, Selective laser melting laboratory research

Citation Information : Bajunaid SO, Altwaim B, Alhassan M, Alammari R. The Fit Accuracy of Removable Partial Denture Metal Frameworks Using Conventional and 3D Printed Techniques: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (4):476-481.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2542

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-08-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the accuracy of removable partial denture (RPD) metal frameworks fabricated by the conventional lost-wax (CLW) technique and those made by the selective laser melting (SLM). Materials and methods: A dentoform of a mandibular Kennedy class III, modification 1 dental arch were surveyed, and rest seats were prepared on the abutment teeth. The dentoform was then duplicated into a metal die which was used as a reference model. Thirty RPD metal frameworks were fabricated by two techniques; fifteen for each technique. Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression material was painted on the intaglio surface of the rests of each framework which is then seated on the reference die. PVS specimens that represent the gap under the rest were measured in four zones: buccal, lingual, marginal and central by a single examiner using a digital microscope at 50x in micrometers. Results: Comparison between the two techniques for each abutment tooth revealed that the CLW technique had better fit in one tooth, while the SLM technique showed a better fit in two teeth. Regarding the edentulous span length within the SLM technique, the long edentulous span had a significantly better fit. When comparing the four measured rest zones, it was found that in the CLW technique group, the marginal zone had the highest fit accuracy while the lingual zone showed the lowest fit accuracy. In the SLM group, the central zone had the best fit and the buccal zone had the worst fit. Conclusion: RPD frameworks fabricated using the SLM technique showed better fit accuracy than those made by the CLW technique, however, the difference was not statistically significant. Clinical significance: SLM is a promising technique for the fabrication of RPD frameworks in routine clinical practice.

PDF Share
  1. Starr JM, Hall R. Predictors and correlates of edentulism in healthy older people. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2010;13(1):19-23.
  2. Abt E, Carr AB, Worthington H V. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(2).
  3. Stewart KL, Rudd KD KW. Stewart's Clinical Removable Partial Prosthodontic, 4th edition. 2008.695p.
  4. Stefanac S, Nesbit S. Treatment Planning in Dentistry. Treatment Planning in Dentistry. 2007.
  5. Van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. The Academy of Dental Materials 2012;28(1):3-12.
  6. Rudd RW, Rudd KD. A review of 243 errors possible during the fabrication of a removable partial denture: Part I. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86(3):251-261.
  7. Campbell SD, Cooper L, Craddock H, et al. Removable partial dentures: The clinical need for innovation. J Prosthet Dent United States; 2017;118(3):273-280.
  8. Kruth J, Mercelis P, Van Vaerenbergh J, et al. Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J 2005;11(1):26-36.
  9. Sun J, Zhang F-Q. The Application of Rapid Prototyping in Prosthodontics. J Prosthodont 2012;21(8):641-644.
  10. Yager S, Ma J, Ozcan H, et al. Mechanical properties and microstructure of removable partial denture clasps manufactured using selective laser melting. Addit Manuf. 2015;8:117-123.
  11. Matsumoto M, Shiomi M, Osakada K, et al. Finite element analysis of single layer forming on metallic powder bed in rapid prototyping by selective laser processing. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2002;42(1):61-67.
  12. Parker MH, Cameron SM, Hughbanks JC, et al. Comparison of occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation for two impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78(3):255-259.
  13. Stern MA, Brudvik JS, Frank RP. Clinical evaluation of removable partial denture rest seat adaptation. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53(5):658-662.
  14. Azari A, Nikzad S. The evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review. Rapid Prototyp J 2009;15(3):216-225.
  15. Arnold C, Hey J, Schweyen R, et al. Accuracy of CAD-CAM-fabricated removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2017;1-7.
  16. Williams RJ, Bibb R, Eggbeer D, et al. Use of CAD/CAM technology to fabricate a removable partial denture framework. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(2):96-99.
  17. Qian B, Saeidi K, Kvetkova L, et al. Defects-tolerant Co-Cr-Mo dental alloys prepared by selective laser melting. Dent Mater. The Academy of Dental Materials 2015;31(12):1435-1444.
  18. Kajima Y, Takaichi A, Nakamoto T, et al. Fatigue strength of Co-Cr-Mo alloy clasps prepared by selective laser melting. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. Elsevier 2016;59:446-458.
  19. Almufleh B, Emami E, Alageel O, et al. Patient satisfaction with lasersintered removable partial dentures: A crossover pilot clinical trial. J Prosthet Dent 2017;1-9.
  20. Akeel R. Effect of edentulousridge length on the fit of occlusal rests of a partial denture metal framework. Dent J 2009;29(2):391-396.
  21. Anan MTM, Al-Saadi MH. Fit accuracy of metal partial removable dental prosthesis frameworks fabricated by traditional or light curing modeling material technique: An in vitro study. Saudi Dent J King Saud University; 2015;27(3):149-154.
  22. Veljee TM, Shruthi CS, Poojya R. Comparative evaluation of the fit of the partial denture framework fabricated from conventional casting wax and light cured pattern wax. an in vitro study. 2014;2(4): 8-12.
  23. Rudd KD. Morrow RM EE. Dental laboratory procedures: Removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1987;3(5).
  24. Dootz ER, Graig RG, Peyton FA. Influence of Investments and Duplicating Procedures on the Accuracy of Partial Denture Castings. J Prosthet Dent. 1965;15:679-690.
  25. Lameir BR, Rudd KD SR. Making chromium-cobalt removable patial dentures: a modified technique. J Prosthet Dent 2007;203(11):662- 662.
  26. Rantanen T. Inaccuracies and defects in frameworks for removable partial dentures. 1986;13:347-353.
  27. Brudvik JS, Reimers D. The tooth-removable partial denture interface. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68(6):924-927.
  28. Earnshaw R. The casting shrinkage of cobalt-chromium alloys. Aust Dent J 1958;3(3):159-170.
  29. Anusavice, Kenneth J; Shen, Chiayi; Rawls HR. Phillips' science of dental materials. 2012.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.