Explore the vast range of titles available.

Removable Prosthodontics at a Glance provides a comprehensive and accessible guide to the practical elements of complete and partial denture provision. It serves as the perfect illustrated guide for learners, and a handy revision guide for subsequent undergraduate and postgraduate studies. Following the familiar, easy to use at a Glance format, each topic is presented as a double page spread with text accompanied by clear colour diagrams and clinical photographs to support conceptual understanding. Key concepts such as patient assessment, material handling, denture design, making impressions, and much more are explained and superbly illustrated enabling the reader to visualise the intended clinical endpoint. Removable Prosthodontics at a Glance is a valuable resource for students studying dentistry and clinical dental technology, and those preparing for further studies in Prosthodontics.

Objectives The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare implant‐supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) with distal extension removable partial dentures (DERPDs) in terms of patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs: patients' quality of life and satisfaction) and to determine mechanical and biological complications associated with ISRPDs. Material and Methods An electronic search was performed on four databases to identify studies treating Kennedy class I or II edentulous patients and which compared ISRPDs with DERPDs in terms of PROMS and studies, which evaluated mechanical and biological complications associated ISRPDs. Two authors independently extracted data on quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications from these studies. The risk of bias was assessed for each study, and for PROMs, the authors performed a meta‐analysis by using a random‐effects model. Results Thirteen articles were included based on the selection criteria. The difference in mean scores for quality of life (30.5 ± 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.9–36.1) and patient satisfaction (−20.8 ± 0.2; 95% CI, −23.7 to −17.8) between treatments with conventional and implant‐supported removable dentures was statistically significant (p < .05). Implant‐supported removable dentures improved patients' overall quality of life and satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications, such as clasp adjustment, abutment or implant loosening, marginal bone resorption, and peri‐implant mucositis, were noted in ISRPDs during patient follow‐up. Studies assessing PROMs were very heterogeneous (I2 = 65%, p = .85; I2 = 75%, p = .88). Conclusions ISRPDs significantly improved quality of life and patient satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications have been associated with ISRPDs treatment, requiring regular monitoring of patients to avoid the occurrence of these complications.

Background When designing removable partial dentures, maximizing the effectiveness of support and bracing is necessary to minimize denture movement. Therefore, it is essential to emphasize the importance of providing patients with appropriate, safe, and secure removable partial dentures and have clinicians rerecognize the concept and importance of support and bracing. This study aimed to present extension-base removable partial dentures through six specific clinical case series and describe the effect of support and bracing action on denture design, which is essential for denture movement minimization. A Case Series Study Case presentation: The case series highlights the importance of utilizing the contact between the axial surface of the abutment tooth and denture components to provide effective support and bracing action. Furthermore, it emphasizes the need to improve the bracing action by connecting the minor connector and proximal plate with the guiding plane set for multiple teeth (frictional control), control the direction of the denture during the placement/removal (path of insertion), and consider the major connector form to improve the support and bracing actions. Effective support and bracing actions are necessary not only for the retainer but also for the denture components, including the design of the denture base and major connector. Removable partial dentures with “frictional control” and “path of insertion” are expected to reduce denture movement and improve stability. Conclusions The denture design described in this study is essential in pre- and postgraduate dental education, and the author believes that it will be helpful for dental students, interns, or residents in clinical practice. Key Clinical Message In designing removable partial dentures, the importance of support and bracing effects that utilize the contact between the axial surface of the abutment tooth and the denture structure is required as a specific measure for minimizing denture movement.

This study aimed to investigate the effects of removable prostheses on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), the effects of removable prostheses on chewing ability and the effects of prosthesis type (Removable partial denture RPD versus complete denture CD) and sociodemographic factors on both chewing ability and OHRQoL. Data from 90 participants were collected using a questionnaire. Chewing ability and OHRQoL were assessed before and after treatment through questionnaires. A two-tailed α of 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals were applied to identify statistically significant results in this survey. Differences between the RPD and CD treatment groups in terms of demographic variables (gender, age, income, education level, smoking status, medical history, and social connections) and previous denture experience were analysed using the Mann‒Whitney U test. Participants with RPD or CD demonstrated significant improvements in chewing ability and OHRQoL post-treatment ( p  < 0.05), except for females in the RPD group, who showed no significant changes. Compared with the CD group, the RPD group had significantly better chewing ability both before ( p  < 0.001) and after ( p  = 0.027) treatment. The RPD group also reported better outcomes in many aspects, including less jaw pain, greater comfort while eating, and improved denture stability ( p  < 0.05). Stepwise regression revealed that higher income and smoking were associated with better pre-treatment outcomes, whereas having multiple dentures and smoking predicted worse post-treatment chewing scores. Notably, higher post-treatment chewing scores were associated with improved OHRQoL. Both the RPD and CD groups reported improved chewing ability and OHRQoL, with RPD resulting in superior functional outcomes. Sociodemographic factors such as income, sex, age, and smoking habits influenced the results both before and after treatment. These findings highlight the importance of individualised patient assessment and support the clinical value of RPDs in partially edentulous patients.

Background and Objectives: Oral rehabilitation seeks to enhance mastication, a vital component of oral function that is compromised by tooth loss. This study aimed to assess the degree of improvement of masticatory performance in partially edentulous patients rehabilitated with removable partial dentures (RPD) or fixed partial dental prosthesis (FPDP). Changes in the occlusal contact area (OCA) and satisfaction with their chewing ability during the adaptation period were also evaluated. Materials and Methods: in total, 34 partially edentulous participants (median age 65.3 years; 56% women) who received an RPD or FPDP were assessed using masticatory performance assay, OCA calculation, and a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: Masticatory performance improved by 20% (range from 17% to 25%, p < 0.05) depending on the edentulism and the rehabilitation types. The OCA improved by 4.7 mm2 (p < 0.05) and satisfaction with the masticatory function improved by 9% (p < 0.05) 3 months after prosthesis insertion. Conclusions: Conventional prostheses benefited partially edentulous individuals, improving masticatory performance by 20%. Treatment also increased the OCA in all types of partial edentulism, except in Kennedy class I patients rehabilitated with RPD. Patients’ satisfaction with their chewing ability only increased in Kennedy class III patients rehabilitated with RPD.

Background Due to lack of consensus on optimal unilateral attachment retained partial denture design, this finite element comparative analysis study was conducted to measure the stresses induced from four different attachment-retained lower Kennedy class II removable partial denture (RPD) designs around the abutment teeth and the supporting residual ridge. Materials and methods An educational cast of lower Kennedy class II having the first premolar as the last standing abutment was used. The abutment teeth - canine and first premolar- of the edentulous side were reduced to receive two splinted porcelain veneered metal crowns, while the intact side was prepared to receive a double Aker’s clasp and mesial rest seat for indirect retention. Then the cast was scanned, and the partial denture components and the splinted crowns were designed and assembled digitally using Blender4dental software. According to the attachment used; partial dentures were designed as follows: design 1: unilateral PD retained by OT cap attachment, design 2: unilateral RPD retained by double OT cap attachment, design 3: unilateral RPD retained by mini-bar attachment, and design 4: RPD retained by OT cap with major connector crossing the arch for stabilization (conventional RPD). The Meshmex software was used to modify the STL file, and the Abaqus software was used for finite element analysis. On the edentulous side, the first and second molars were subjected to vertical loads of 200 N and tangential loads of 23.5 N, while the first and second premolars were subjected to vertical loads of 140 N and tangential loads of 16.45 N. The von Misses stress levels induced around the abutments and at the residual ridge were measured and compared. Results The lowest stresses were found with the conventional RPD design. Regarding von Mises stresses on the prepared abutments; The lowest von Mises stresses were found in design 4, followed by design 1, then design 3, while the highest von Mises stresses were found in design 2. Regarding von-Mises stresses on the residual ridge, the lowest Von Mises stresses were found in design 4, followed by design 3, then design 2, while the highest Von Mises stresses were found in design 1. Conclusions The attachment retained RPD with a conventional design offered the lowest stresses applied for the abutment and the residual ridge. OT cap attachment exerts the least stress on the abutments when used in unilateral design RPD, so it is preferable for abutment preservation but contraindicated in weak ridges, however, the double OT cap exerts the highest amount of force on the abutment teeth and could be used with abutments showing perfect periodontal condition.

ObjectivesTo evaluate and to compare the clinical performance and survival rate of posterior monolithic and veneered zirconia fixed partial dentures (FPDs).Material and methodsSixty 3-unit posterior FPDs were included in the study. The patients were randomly distributed into two groups (n = 30 each) to receive either a monolithic (Zenostar T, Wieland Dental) or veneered zirconia (IPS e.max ZirCAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) FPD. Each patient received only 1 FPD. Tooth preparations were scanned (Trios 3, 3Shape), designed (Dental System 2016, 3 Shape), milled (Zenotec CAM 3.2, Wieland Dental), and cemented with a resin cement. Technical and biological outcomes and periodontal parameters were assessed. Data analysis was made using the Friedman and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with the Bonferroni correction and the Mann–Whitney U test.ResultsThe survival rate at 3 years was 100% for veneered and 90% for monolithic zirconia restorations. Three monolithic zirconia FPDs were lost because of biologic complications. The main complication in the veneered zirconia FPDs was the fracture of the veneering ceramic in 4 of the veneered zirconia FPDs. No fracture of the frameworks was observed in any of the groups. All restorations were assessed as satisfactory after 3 years. No differences in periodontal parameters were observed between the groups.ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that monolithic zirconia and complete digital flow could be a viable alternative to veneered zirconia in the posterior regions.Clinical relevanceThe monolithic zirconia restorations with a digital workflow can be a viable alternative in posterior fixed partial dentures, with good periodontal outcomes.Clinical trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT 04,879,498).

Flexible dentures are an increasingly interesting prosthetic alternative both for dental practitioners (dentists and dental technicians), but also for patients. This type of prosthetic restoration can rehabilitate a wide range of edentulous, but the financial effort that patients have to make is more consistent than in the case of a partial acrylic dentures. In this study, we will try to present some essential aspects in the technology of creating flexible partial dentures.

Objective. Analyzing and comparing the fit and accuracy of removable partial denture (RPDs) frameworks fabricated with CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping methods with conventional techniques. Materials and Methods. The present systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines. The search was carried out on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane collaboration, Science direct, and Scopus scientific engines using selected MeSH keywords. The articles fulfilling the predefined selection criteria based on the fit and accuracy of removable partial denture (RPD) frameworks constructed from digital workflow (CAD/CAM; rapid prototyping) and conventional techniques were included. Results. Nine full-text articles comprising 6 in vitro and 3 in vivo studies were included in this review. The digital RPDs were fabricated in all articles by CAD/CAM selective laser sintering and selective laser melting techniques. The articles that have used CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping technique demonstrated better fit and accuracy as compared to the RPDs fabricated through conventional techniques. The least gaps between the framework and cast (41.677±15.546 μm) were found in RPDs constructed through digital CAD/CAM systems. Conclusion. A better accuracy was achieved using CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping techniques. The RPD frameworks fabricated by CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping techniques had clinically acceptable fit, superior precision, and better accuracy than conventionally fabricated RPD frameworks.

Background This study aimed to determine and compare the stresses transmitted by metal acrylic and polyamide removable partial dentures (RPDs) on free-end saddle areas. Methods Twenty metal acrylic and polyamide removable partial dentures were made. The stresses transmitted on the free end saddle area were determined and compared by using the strain gauge resistance method, in which sensors were installed in the epoxy resin cast. The load was applied on removable partial dentures with the underlying cast through the universal testing machine. Data was collected through the connected strain meter and computer. The analysis was done using ANSYS version 15, and the results were analyzed. Results The polyamide distal extension removable partial dentures transmit higher but even stresses on the free end saddle area compared to metal acrylic distal extension RPDs. The forces transmitted by polyamide distal extension base RPDs distribute an even load on the ridge, whereas metal acrylic distal extension base RPDs distribute an uneven load on the ridge. P value equal to and < 0.05 was considered significant, and our results showed insignificant statistical differences. Conclusion Stress distribution in polyamide distal extension removable partial dentures is even compared to metal acrylic distal extension removable partial dentures. Even force distribution is less damaging to the bone and surrounding tissues.