The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 5 ( May, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Bond Strength of Cantilever Resin-retained Bridge Designs: An In Vitro Study

David Livingstone, Rajkumar Eugene, Varsha Ravichandran

Keywords : Bond strength, Fixed partial denture, Mandibular anterior, Resin-bonded bridges, Resin cement

Citation Information : Livingstone D, Eugene R, Ravichandran V. Evaluation of Bond Strength of Cantilever Resin-retained Bridge Designs: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (5):492-496.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3336

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 10-08-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the bond strength of three cantilever resin-bonded bridge (RBB) designs cemented with resin cements. Materials and methods: Twenty-four extracted human mandibular canines with eight teeth per group were used in this study to evaluate the bond strength of cantilever resin-retained bridge designs of the mesh, perforated, and combination of mesh and perforated luted to the prepared lingual surface of canine teeth using resin cement. Debonding was done using Instron universal testing machine by applying load on the mid-buccal region of the pontic and the obtained values were evaluated. The data was analyzed statistically. Results: The mean shear bond strengths of mesh, perforated, and combination of mesh and perforated are 0.88 ± 0.31 MPa, 0.81 ± 0.31 MPa, and 0.93 ± 0.32 MPa. However, there is no significant differences in the statistical analysis that were performed using a one-factor analysis of variant (ANOVA) test (p = 0.744). Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study for cantilever resin-retained bridge designs, the combination of mesh and perforated design showed greater mean shear bond values when compared with the mesh design and perforated designs. This shows equal in vitro performance to the gold standard designs (group A is mesh design and group B is perforated design). Clinical significance: The new design which is the combination of mesh and perforated shows equal in vitro performance to the gold standard designs. Thus, their use in clinical situation can bring better result in concern to cantilever resin-retained prosthesis.

PDF Share
  1. Chan AW, Barnes IE. A prospective study of cantilever resin‐bonded bridges: An initial report. Aust Dent J 2000;45(1):31–36. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2000.tb00239.x.
  2. Ibrahim AA, Hussey DL, Claffey N. Bond strengths of maxillary anterior base metal resin-bonded retainers with different thicknesses. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78(3):281–285. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(97)70027-1.
  3. Flood AM. Resin bonded prostheses: clinical guidelines. Aust Dental J 1989;34(3):209–218. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1989.tb00671.x.
  4. St George G, Hemmings K, Patel K. Resin-retained bridges re-visited. Part 1. History and indications. Prim Dent Care 2002;9(3):87–91. DOI: 10.1308/135576102322492927.
  5. Durey KA, Nixon PJ, Robinson S, et al. Resin bonded bridges: techniques for success. Br Dent J 2011;211(3):113–118. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.619.
  6. Tezulas E, Yildiz C, Evren B, et al. Clinical procedures, designs, and survival rates of all‐ceramic resin‐bonded fixed dental prostheses in the anterior region: a systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30(4):307–318. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12389.
  7. Balasubramaniam GR. Predictability of resin bonded bridges: a systematic review. Br Dent J 2017;222(11):849–858. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.497.
  8. Williams VD, Drennon DG, Silverstone LM. The effect of retainer design on the retention of filled resin in acid-etched fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48(4):417–423. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(82)90078-6.
  9. Burgess JO, McCartney JG. Anterior retainer design for resin-bonded acid-etched fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61(4):433–436. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90009-7.
  10. Tay WM. Types of resin-bonded bridges. Resin-Bonded Bridges: A practitioner's Guide. London: Martin Dunitz, 1992.1. pp. 11.
  11. Berekally TL, Smales RJ. A retrospective clinical evaluation of resin‐bonded bridges inserted at the Adelaide Dental Hospital. Aust Dent J 1993;38(2):85–96. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1993.tb05468.x.
  12. Olin PS, Hill EM, Donahue JL. Clinical evaluation of resin-bonded bridges: a retrospective study. Quintessence Int 1991;22(11):873–877. PMID: 1812510.
  13. Kern M. Clinical long-term survival of two-retainer and single-retainer all-ceramic resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. Quintessence Int 2005;36(2):141–147. PMID: 15732550.
  14. Sillam CE, Cetik S, Ha TH, et al. Influence of the amount of tooth surface preparation on the shear bond strength of zirconia cantilever single-retainer resin-bonded fixed partial denture. J Adv Prosthodont 2018;10(4):286–290. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.286.
  15. Fonseca RG, Haneda IG, Adabo GL. Effect of metal primers on bond strength of resin cements to base metals. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101(4):262–268. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60050-0.
  16. Yun JY, Ha SR, Lee JB, et al. Effect of sandblasting and various metal primers on the shear bond strength of resin cement to Y-TZP ceramic. Dent Mater 2010;26(7):650–658. DOI: 10.1016/
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.