Showing papers by "Daniel Edelhoff published in 2002"

Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for anterior teeth

Abstract: Statement of Problem. The conservation of sound tooth structure helps preserve tooth vitality and reduce postoperative sensitivity. Innovative preparation designs, like those for porcelain laminate veneers, are much less invasive than conventional complete-coverage crown preparations. However, no study has quantified the amount of tooth structure removed during these preparations. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the amount of tooth structure removed when various innovative and conventional tooth preparation designs were completed on different teeth. Material and Methods. A new comprehensive tooth preparation design classification system was introduced. Typodont resin teeth representing the maxillary left central incisor, maxillary left canine, and mandibular left central incisor were prepared with the following designs: partial (V1), traditional (V2), extended (V3), and complete (V4) porcelain laminate veneer preparations; resin-bonded retainer preparation with grooves (A1) and with wing/grooves (A2); all-ceramic crown preparation with 0.8 mm axial reduction and tapering chamfer finish line (F1), all-ceramic crown preparation with 1.0 mm axial reduction and rounded shoulder finish line (F2), and metal-ceramic crown with 1.4 mm axial reduction and facial shoulder finish line (F3). After tooth preparations (10 per group), the crown was separated from the root at the CEJ. The removed coronal tooth structure was measured with gravimetric analysis. Means and standard deviations for tooth structure removal with different preparation designs were calculated and analyzed with analysis of variance at a significance level of P Results. Significant differences in the amount of tooth structure removal were noted between preparation designs. Ceramic veneers and resin-bonded prosthesis retainers were the least invasive preparation designs, removing approximately 3% to 30% of the coronal tooth structure by weight. Approximately 63% to 72% of the coronal tooth structure was removed when teeth were prepared for all-ceramic and metal-ceramic crowns. For a single crown restoration, the tooth structure removal required for an F3 preparation (metal-ceramic crown) was 4.3 times greater than for a V2 preparation (porcelain laminate veneer, facial surface only) and 2.4 times greater than for a V4 preparation (more extensive porcelain laminate veneer). Conclusion. Within the limitations of this study, tooth preparations for porcelain laminate veneers and resin-bonded prostheses required approximately one-quarter to one-half the amount of tooth reduction of conventional complete-coverage crowns. (J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:503-9.)

Tooth Structure Removal Associated with Various Preparation Designs for Posterior Teeth

Abstract: The amount of tooth structure removed for various innovative and conventional preparation designs for fixed prosthodontics was quantified. Four Typodont resin teeth representing maxillary and mandibular premolars and molars were prepared in various abutment designs: adhesive, box (A2); adhesive, wing and groove (A3); mesioocclusal or distoocclusal inlay; mesio-occlusodistal inlay (13); mesio-occlusodistal onlay; partial crown; half crown (only molars); complete crown, 0.8-mm circumferential tapered chamfer (F1); complete crown, 1.0-mm circumferential rounded shoulder; and complete crown, 1.4-mm axial reduction facial shoulder, 0.7-mm lingual chamfer (F3). After tooth preparation (10 per group), the root was separated from the anatomic crown at the cementoenamel junction. Removal of tooth structure was measured by gravimetric analysis in a high-precision balance. Preparations A3 and F3 were assigned as abutments for metal-supported restorations, whereas all other preparations were used for all-ceramic restorations. When the mean structure removal of all teeth tested was compared, the adhesive and inlay abutments were the least invasive preparation designs, ranging from approximately 5.5% (A2) to 27.2% (13) tooth structure removal. Complete crowns required the most invasive preparations, ranging from 67.5% (F1) to 75.6% (F3) tooth structure removal. The tooth structure removal required for F3 retainers was almost 14 times greater than for an A2 preparation. Tooth structure removal was also influenced by the morphology of the tooth. The first comprehensive tooth preparation design classification system was introduced. The measurement system used in this study provides an accurate method of quantifying tooth structure removal for fixed prosthodontic preparations. The innovative preparation designs studied conserved significant amounts of tooth structure, yielding a better prognosis for the restored tooth.

A review of esthetic pontic design options.

Abstract: Advances in the field of restorative materials allow a lost tooth to be replaced by artificial tooth structure that is virtually indiscernible from the original. However, in fixed partial dentures the standards for the pontic area and the adjacent soft tissue in the maxillary anterior region have increased in particular. The pontic design in this region is primarily influenced by esthetic and phonetic considerations. Local defects of the alveolar ridge often complicate restorative measures. Treatment methods proposed to solve this problem involve modification of the pontic design and pretreatment of the recipient site for the pontic. This article reviews the different clinical and technical options that are available for designing esthetic and functional pontics for the anterior region.