JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
A study on the difference analysis between an ideal and a clinical shape in case of manufacturing a metal-ceramic pontic substructure
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
A study on the difference analysis between an ideal and a clinical shape in case of manufacturing a metal-ceramic pontic substructure
Kim, Wook-Tae; Im, Su-Yeon;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this research is to determine whether pontic metal substructures, which are currently used in clinical surgeries, are designed appropriately and identify the problems that can occur due to their shape, size, and position. Then it aimed to emphasize the importance of making and designing pontic metal substructures based on basic principles. Materials and Methods: This research measured pontic basal surface (P1) used sample metal substructures in this study, gingiva margin (P2), and the porcelain thickness of maximum infrabulge of labial surface around 1/3 of cervix dentis (P3). One-way ANOVA analysis was carried out to test the differences among groups, Tukey Honestly Significant Difference Test was conducted for statistical analysis among groups. Results: For porcelain thickness and SD value, the P1 part was for experimental group 1, for experimental group 2, and for experimental group 3. Next, the P2 part was for experimental group 1, for experimental group 2, and for experimental group 3. The P3 part was for experimental group 1, for experimental group 2, and for experimental group 3. There was no significance when One-way ANOVA analysis/Tukey Honestly Significant Difference Test was conducted for statistical analysis among groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The suggested metal substructures can be used clinically as they meet the requirements that pontic must have.
 Keywords
pontic;metal substructures;gingiva margin;height of contour;porcelain;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Kim JB, Kim KS, Kim YH, Jeong SH, Jin BH, Chio EM, Hwang YS. Public oral health. 3rd ed. Seoul; KMS; 2004. p. 223-76.

2.
Silver M, Haward MC, Klein G. Porcelain bonded to a cast metal understructure. J Prosthet Dent 1961;11:132-45. crossref(new window)

3.
Hobo S, Shillingburg HT Jr. Porcelain fused to metal: tooth preparation and coping design. J Prosthet Dent 1973;30:28-36. crossref(new window)

4.
Miler LL. Framework design in ceramo-metal restorations. Dent Clin North Am 1977;21:699-716.

5.
Shelby DS. Practical considerations and design of porcelain fused to metal. J Prosthet Dent 1962;12: 542-48. crossref(new window)

6.
Straussberg G, Katz G, Kuwata M. Design of gold supporting structures for fused porcelain restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1966;16:928-36. crossref(new window)

7.
Faucher RR, Nicholls JI. Distortion related to margin design in porcelain fused to metal restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1980;43:149-55. crossref(new window)

8.
Tylman SD. Theory and practice of crown and bridge prosthodontics. 5th ed. St. Louis; C V Mosby; 1965. p. 23-24.

9.
Kim WT. Applying the new technology for making pontic ridge lap in posterior bridge restoration. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2013;29:308-16. crossref(new window)

10.
Yang JH. Technical consideration for ceramo-metal restorations. J Korean Dent Assoc 1981;9:339-42.

11.
Brecker SC. Porcelain baked to gold. A new medium in Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1956;6:801-10. crossref(new window)

12.
McLean JW. The science and art of dental ceramics. Chicago; Quintescence; 1979. p. 149-56.

13.
Warpeha WS Jr, Goodkind RJ. Design and technique variables affecting fracture resistance of metalceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1976;35:291-8. crossref(new window)

14.
Sillness J. Fixed prosthodontics and periodontal health. Dent Clin North Am 1980;24:317-29.