Clinical Evaluation of Resin-Bonded Bridges: a Retrospective Study Paul S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Prosthodontics Clinical evaluation of resin-bonded bridges: a retrospective study Paul S. Olin* / Elaine M. E. Hill^ " / James L. Donahue* * * Eighty-five patients with a total of 103 resin-bonded bridges placed by practitioners at the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry between 1982 and ¡989 were recalled for a clinical evaluation of their restorations. Tissue condition, patient satisfaction, bridge failures by iocation and by sex of patient, and average length of service for both successful and failed bridges were recorded. After an average service of 3.25 years, 12.6% of the fixed partial dentures had debonded. Debondings occtirred most fre- quently in the mandibular arch. Failures occurred more frequently in men than in women, and prostheses with more than two retainers had twice the probability for problems. (Quintessence Int 1991:22:873-877.) Introduction posite resin. The framework of this restoration still relied on perforations for retention, and Howe and Since Rochettc' first adapted the resin-bonding Denehy were extremely conservative in their expecta- technique to attach a fixed periodontal splint to tions regarding the longevity of the prosthesis, referring enamel without removing tooth structure, the idea of to it as a provisional restoration. a resin-bonded bridge that would not entail the re- In the perforated framework popularized by moval of healthy tooth structure on abutment teeth Rochette, retention is limited to areas around Ihe but that would provide a permanent restoration has perforations, and is not consistent within the entire been attractive to both practitioners and patients. framework. In an effort to improve the resin-to-metal Rochette's goid, perforated framework was retained bond. Lividitis and Thompson"* described a technique hy small holes placed in its structure through which whereby the inner !iide of a nonprecious-alloy bridge resin was extruded. framework could be electrolytically etched to produce This same technique, when applied to fixed a microscopically ronghened snrface that would he bridgework. became known as the "Rochette bridge." suitable for mechanical bonding to an adhesive. The Howe and Denehy" reported the first use of the "Maryland bridge," as this technique came to he Rochette sphnt to replace missing teeth. They used a called colloquially, provided the same esthetic resuh nonprecious alloy framework bonded to acid-etched and preservation of tooth structure as the Rochette enamel with a chemically cured dimethacryiate com- bridge, but was more versatile and offered the hope of improved retention. At the time of their report, Lividitis and Thompson' had placed 65 fixed partial dentures of three to six units over a period of 12 months. • Assistant Professor, Division of Prosthodontics, University of Minnesota, School of Dentistry, 9-4511 Malcolm Moos Health Brady et al'* tested the shear bond strength of elec- Sciences Tower, 515 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, Min- trolytically etched versus perforated frameworks. The nesota 55455, Principle Laboratory Technician, Dental Researeh Institute. etched samples in this study were able to withstand University of Minnesota, School of Dentistry, 18-104 Malcolm more than fonr times the breaking load of the per- Mous Health Sciences Tower. forated samples. However, Brady et al'' cautioned that Associate Professor, Division of Prosthodonties, University of the clinical complexity as well as shear bond strength Minnesota, School of Dentistry, 9-450 Malcolm Moos Health of etched retainers must be factored into their use. Sciences Tower. Quintessence International Volume 22, Number 11/1991 873 Prosthodontics Long-term evaluations of the Maryland or resin- Method and materials bonded bridge have been reported, Al-Shammery and Ibraheem reported a 12.2% success rate of 36 bridges All patients identified through records as having had after 38 months. Twenty posterior and 16 anterior otie or more resin-bonded bridges placed between 1982 bridges were plaeed using etched Rexilliutn alloy and 1989 were invited to participate in a recall exami- (Jeneric/Pentron Inc) and Comspan (LD Cauik/Dent- nation. Of the 85 patients who responded, 47 were sply International). Of the 10 prostheses that debonded, women and 38 were men. The 85 patients had a total six were mandibular premolars and four were man- of 1Ü3 bridges: 69 had one, 14 had two, and two had dibular molars. Priest and Donatelli" presented a three prostheses. Resin-bonded bridges, adjacent 4-year clinical evaluation of fixed partial dentures with teeth, opposing dentition, and gingiva were examined. a mean life at evaluation of 23 months (range of 2 to Failures were noted by location and retainer type. 51 months). Ten of the bridges had dislodged (17,2%) Wear of the framework or teeth, occlusion on the and the authors reported that frameworks that were hridge, tissue condition, appearance of visible bonding chemically etched performed better than electrolyt- agent, the presence or absence of caries, integrity of ically etched or perforated designs. Their results did margins, and patient satisfaction with the restoration not indicate that location affects retention, and they were noted. Because of the uncontrolled conditions were among the first to consider the resin-bonded under which the fixed partial dentures were placed, bridge a "definitive" prosthesis, bonding agents and metal types were often unavailable Williams et al' reported on the conditioti of 99 fixed and were therefore not noted, Intraoral photographs partial dentures placed over 10 years. Eighty-eight were taken of each patient. percent of the bridges evaluated in this study were made of nickel-chromium alloy and 12% of noble ceramoalloys. Seventy-two percent had perforations as the retentive mechanism, and 28% were retained with Results the electrochemieally etched metal method. The mean Bridge failures, successes, problems and wing-pontic age of prostheses at recall was 3,4 years, and the mean ratios for successful versus problem bridges are re- age of debonded prostheses was 2,2 years. The rate of ported in Tables 1 to 4. Representative clinical photo- debonding for all causes was 31%, The etched and graphs of failed (Figs 1 to 3) and successful {Figs 4 perforated restorations experienced nearly equal rates and 5) resin-bonded bridges are shown. of debonding. This is interesting in light of the claims made for superior retention of etched frameworks. The authors did not report any statistically significant Discussion differences based on the age or sex of patients in the Almost 13% of the bridges recalled had to be reluted study. Creugers et aP '" reported the results of a 5- or remade. This rate compares favorably with rates year prospective study of 203 bridges placed under reported previously.^'' As Creugers et al"^ also noted, controlled clinical conditions. They reported a de- mandibular prostheses failed nearly twice as often as bonding rate of 22% at 5 years, Mandibuiar posterior maxillary prostheses. Resin-bonded bridges with prostheses showed the lowest retention ratio and the multiple abutments were more likely to fail. This may authors characterized the results of these restorations be attributed to mandibular flexure," This flexure may "disappointing," Etched metal frameworks were more create a torquing of the tooth within the periodontal retentive than perforated frameworks, and no oper- ligament space and the bridge itself, Fischman'- noted ator effect was found. It is important to note, how- that this stress may result in a breakdown of the bonding ever, that the restorations were placed by calibrated agent. operators under controlled conditions. The rnajority (57%) of the debondings were adhesive failures at the While Williams et al' did not report any gender- metal-resin interface, "Chewing hard food'" was re- based differences in debonding täte, debondings in the corded as the most frequently known reason for de- present study were noted more frequently in men than bonding. in women. This may be attributed to physical factors, such as the lower bite force experienced by women,'"' The present study reports the condition of 103 resin- or perhaps to sociological factors, such as the higher bortded bridges plaeed between 1982 and 19S9 by level of dental awareness and utilization found among different operators at the University of Minnesota, women.'''""' 874 Quintessence Internationai Volume 22, Number 11/1991 Prosthodontics Table 1 Number of successes by loeation in the tiiouth Maxillaryariferior 41of46 (89%) Combination of maxillary 5 of 5(100%) anterior and posterior Maxillary posterior 8of 9 (89%) Mandibularatiterior 16of22 (73%) Mandibular posterior 16 of 21 (76 % ) Table 2 Number of failures bv location in the mouth Fig 1 Resin-bonded bridge loose at recall. Maxillary anterior 3of4ó (7%) Combination of maxillary Oof 5 (0%) anterior and posterior Maxillary posterior lof 9{11%) Mandibular anterior 5 of 22 (23%) Mandibular posterior 4of21(19%) Table 3 Number of problems by location in the mouth Maxillary anterior 2 of 46 (4%) Combination of maxillary Oof 5 (0%) anterior and posterior Maxillaryposterior lof 9(11%) Fig 2 Caries after wing remováis. Mandibular anterior 3 of 22 (14%) Mandibular posterior 2of21{10%) Table 4 Wng-pontic ratios of recalled resin-bonded bridges Ratio Successful Problem 2/1 82% 18% 2/2 100% 0% 3/1 100% 0% 3/2 67% 33% 4/Ü* 100% 0% 4/1 75% 25% Fig 3 Extent ot caries after wing removal. 4/2 88% 12% 5/1 50% 50% 6/3 100% 0% Splint, Qurntessence International Volutne 22, Number tt/t991 875 Prosthodontics Fig 4 Clinieally successful resin-bonded bridges. Fig 5 Clinically successful resin-bonded bridge. Six bridges were discovered at recall to have current, Acknowledgments althongh repairabie problems, highlighting the need Tlîc authors gratefully acknowledge Dr Omar Zidan. Associate for a rigorous 6-moiith recall program for patients with Professor, Division of Operative Dentistry. University of Min- resin-bonded restorations. The gross decay illustrated nesota, School of Dentistry, and Ihc graduate iludenti under his in Fig 2 remained undetected because the patient did direction for their placemen! of many of the bridges recalled in this study.