References

Chauncey HH, Glass RL, Alman JE. Dental caries. Principal cause of tooth extraction in a sample of US male adults. Caries Res. 1989; 23:(3)200-205
Thilander B, Odman J, GrSndahl K, Lekholm U. Aspects on osseointegrated implants inserted in growing jaws: a biometric and radiographic study in the young pig. Eur J Orthodont. 1992; 14:99-109
Whitworth JM, Walls AW, Wassell RW. Crowns and extra-coronal restorations: endodontic considerations: the pulp, the root-treated tooth and the crown. Br Dent J. 2002; 192:(6)315-327
Hawker DSJ, Boulton MJ. Twenty years research on peer victimisation and psychosocial maladjustment: a meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. J Psychol Psychiatr Allied Disciplines. 2000; 41:441-455
Helen D, Rodd HD, Barker C, Baker SR, Marshman Z, Robinson PG. Social judgements made by children in relation to visible incisor trauma. Dental Traumatol. 2010; 26:2-8
Hussey DL, Linden GJ. The clinical performance of cantilevered resin-retained bridgework. J Dent. 1996; 24:251-256
Chan AWK, Barnes IE. A prospective study of cantilever resin-bonded bridges: an initial report. Aust Dent J. 2000; 45:31-36
Carter NE, Gillgrass TJ, Hobson RS, Jepson N, Meechan JG, Nohl FS, Nunn JH. The interdisciplinary management of hypodontia: orthodontics. Br Dent J. 2003; 194:361-366
Filser F, Luthy H, Kocher P, Scharer P, Gauckler LJ. Posterior all ceramic bridgework; assessment of fracture load and reliability of materials. Quintessence J Dent Technol. 2003; 1:28-41
Guazzato M, Albakry M, Ringer SP, Swain MV. Strength, fracture toughness and microstructure of a selection of all-ceramic materials: Part II. Zirconia based dental ceramics. Dent Mater. 2004; 20:449-456
Marx R, Weber Jungwirth All-ceramic crown and bridge materials – Characteristics and requirements.Eichenbach, Germany: CC&A; 2002
Curtis AR, Wright AJ, Fleming GJP. The influence of simulated masticatory loading regimes on the biaxial flexure strength and reliability of a Y-TZP dental ceramic. J Dentistry. 2005; 34:(5)317-325
Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomaterials. 1999; 20:1-25
Garvie RS, Hannink RH, Pascoe RT Ceramic steel?. Nature. 1975; 258:703-704
Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62:405-408
Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC. Determining the marginal fit of CAD/CAM bridge frameworks. Pan European Federation Conference. 2006;
Beuer F, Fischer T, Erdelt KJ, Aggstaller HU, Spiegl K, Gernet W. In vitro study marginal fit of Lava restorations; industrial report. IADR. 2006;
Shannon AJT, Qian F, Tan P, Gratton D. In Vitro vertical marginal gap comparison of CAD/CAM zirconium copings. IADR. 2007;
Rinn LA.London: Quintessence Publishing;
Lava; Handling and Preparation Guidelines for Dentists and Labs. 2009;
Oh WS, Anusavice KJ. Effect of connector design on the fracture resistance of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dentistry. 2002; 87:536-542
El-Mowafy O. The use of resin cements in restorative dentistry to overcome retention problems. J Can Dent Assoc. 2001; 67:97-102
Sorensen JA, Kang SK, Avera SP. Porcelain-composite interface microleakage with various porcelain surface treatments. Dent Mat. 1991; 7:118-123
Jensen ME, Sheth JJ, Tolliver D. Etched-porcelain resin-bonded full veneer crowns: in vitro fracture resistance. Compendium. 1989; 10:336-347
Bulot D, Sadam A, Burgess JO, Blatz MB. Bond strength of a self-adhesive universal resin cement to Lava zirconia after two surface treatments. AADR. 2003;
Kern M, Wegner SM. Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability. Dent Mater. 1998; 14:64-71
Polder BJ, vant Hof MA, Van der Linden FP, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. A metaanalysis of the prevalence of dental agenesis of permanent teeth. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004; 32:217-226
Slayton RL, Williams L, Murray JC. Genetic association studies of cleft lip and/or palate with hypodontia outside the cleft region. Cleft Palate-Craniofacl J. 40:274-279
Ranta R. A Review of tooth formation in children with cleft lip/palate. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1986; 90:8-11

The use of zirconium, single-retainer, resin-bonded bridges in adolescents

From Volume 38, Issue 10, December 2011 | Pages 706-710

Authors

Sian Williams

Senior House Officer, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Articles by Sian Williams

Sondos Albadri

BDS, PhD, MFDS RCSEd, MPaedDent RCS(Eng), FHEA, FDS (Paed Dent) RCS(Eng), BDS, PhD, MFDS RCS(Ed), MPaedDent, FHEA, FDS (Paed Dent),

SpR Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Articles by Sondos Albadri

Fadi Jarad

BDS, PhD, MFDS RCS (Eng), MRD Endo RCS(Ed), FHEA, FDS Rest Dent RCS(Ed), ITI Fellow

SpR Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Articles by Fadi Jarad

Email Fadi Jarad

Abstract

This paper presents a series of case reports which demonstrate the replacement of the causes of tooth loss which primarily affect children by the use of all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges.

Clinical Relevance: To keep practitioners informed of alternative techniques and materials which can be used to replace missing teeth in adolescents.

Article

Patients have missing teeth for a variety of reasons. Although the most common cause of tooth loss is extraction as a result of caries or periodontal disease,1 children are frequently affected by developmental disorders affecting tooth formation, including cleft lip and palate, and are at an increased risk of trauma leading to tooth loss.

In such childhood cases, the type of prosthesis provided to replace these missing teeth requires careful consideration. The options for replacing missing teeth include:

Implants, although often considered the treatment option of choice for adults, have been shown to react similarly to an ankylosed tooth when placed before the growth of the alveolar process has ceased,2 and hence have a poor prognosis and cannot be recommended in children. Alternative treatment should be considered in these young patients until alveolar bone growth is completed and the patient is able to give informed consent for this complicated and irreversible treatment. Any treatment offered, however, should not preclude the placement of implants in the future should the patient so wish. For this reason, the conventional fixed-fixed or cantilever bridge is not appropriate. The preparation is not only irreversible, but damaging to tooth structure and, due to the presence of larger pulp chambers in young patients, there is a high risk of damage to the pulp.3 This, therefore, leaves the remaining viable options to be a removable partial denture or a resin-bonded bridge. The resin-bonded bridge is therefore often favoured.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available