Burki Z, Watkins S, Wilson R, Fenlon M A randomised controlled trial to investigate the effects of dehydration on tooth colour. J Dent. 2013; 41:250-257
Yamashita A, Yamami T Procedures for applying adhesive resin (MMA–TBB) to crown and bridge restorations. Part 1. The influence of dental non-precious alloys and the treatment of inner surface of metal to adhesion. J Jpn Pros Sot. 1982; 26:584-591
Poyser NJ, Briggs FA The Dycal try-in technique for resin-bonded bridges. Dent Update. 2004; 31:393-397
King PA, Foster LV, Yates RJ, Newcombe RG, Garrett MJ Survival characteristics of 771 resin-retained bridges provided at a UK dental teaching hospital. Br Dent J. 2015; 218:423-428
Djemal S, Setchell D, King P, Wickens J Long-term survival characteristics of 832 resin-retained bridges and splints provided in a post-graduate teaching hospital between 1978 and 1993. J Oral Rehabil. 1999; 26:302-320
Hussey DL, Linden GJ The clinical performance of cantilevered resin-bonded bridgework. J Dent. 1996; 24:251-256
Berekally TL, Smales RJ A retrospective clinical evaluation of resin-bonded bridges inserted at the Adelaide Dental Hospital. Aus Dent J. 1993; 38:85-96
Creugers NH, Kayser AF, Van't Hof MA A seven-and-a-half-year survival study of resin-bonded bridges. J Dent Res. 1992; 71:1822-1825
PANAVIA F2.0 – Kuraray Dental [Internet]. 2011.
Creugers NH Repair and revision 5. Failures and repair of resin-bonded bridges. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2001; 108:254-259
Briggs P, Dunne S, Bishop K The single unit, single retainer, cantilever resin-bonded bridge. Br Dent J. 1996; 181:373-379
Botelho MG, Ma X, Cheung GJ, Law RK, Tai MT, Lam WY Long-term clinical evaluation of 211 two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. J Dent. 2014; 42:778-784
Gibson CJ A modified technique for minimal-preparation, resin-retained bridges: four case reports. Dent Update. 2001; 28:442-448
Miettinen M, Millar BJ A review of the success and failure characteristics of resin-bonded bridges. Br Dent J. 2013; 215
Resin-bonded bridges – the problem or the solution? part 2: practical techniques Jasneet Singh Gulati Sara Tabiat-Pour Sophie Watkins Avijit Banerjee Dental Update 2024 43:7, 707-709.
Professor of Cariology & Operative Dentistry, Hon Consultant in Restorative Dentistry, King's College London Dental Institute at Guy's Hospital, KCL, King's Health Partners, London, UK
This is the second part of this two-part series. The first paper discussed key aspects of case selection, planning and design of resin-bonded bridges (RBBs). This paper outlines the important clinical stages involved in the successful provision of RBBs, including communication with the dental laboratory, clinical protocols and management of the de-bonded RBB.
CPD/Clinical Relevance: This paper aims to provide the general dental practitioner with a practical guide to the successful provision of RBBs, highlighting common barriers to successful treatment and how these may be overcome.
Article
Shade selection should take place prior to the impression stage to prevent tooth dehydration which can result in transient shade change due to desiccation of enamel, leading to poor shade match of the final restoration.1
The shade-taking procedure should also take into account the use of opaque resin cement where this is planned, which may reduce the translucency of abutment teeth.
The shade-taking protocol is as follows:
Place a cotton wool roll behind the chosen abutment tooth to mimic the effect of opaque resin cement. This may alter the appearance of the abutment tooth, usually giving it a creamier appearance incisally. Therefore, this must be factored in during shade selection and prescribing characterizations for the pontic to the dental technician. In some cases, a metal backing can be bonded to the contralateral tooth if it is not being used as an abutment, to match the altered shade of the abutment tooth.
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: