Abutment Analysis of Metallic Denture Frameworks in Mandibular Kenedy Class III Cases

ConditionsOcclusion Prosthesis Durability

Trial statusNot yet recruiting

Trial phaseNot applicable

Trial typeInterventional

Biological sexAll

AgeNot listed

SponsorCairo University

About this trial

This study is aimed to compare CAD/CAM (digitally fabricated) metallic partial denture frameworks to conventionally fabricated metallic partial denture frameworks in mandibular Kennedy class-III arches in terms of abutment health and occlusal analysis

Eligibility criteria

This trial accepts healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Patients with unilateral bounded saddles in the mandible (Kennedy class III).

Opposing dentition is fully intact or restored.

Sufficient inter-arch space.

Angle's class I maxilla-mandibular relationship.

Disqualifiers

Periodontal affection of the abutment teeth.

Skeletal mal-relation.

Unmotivated patients to maintain adequate oral hygiene to follow up.

Patients with neuromuscular and Psychiatric disorders.

Trial design

Design model

Crossover

Treatments tested in this trial

CAD/CAM metallic partial denture frameworks
Other intervention
The CAD/CAM workflow starts with scanning of the physical model (master cast) to create a 3D virtual representation. Dental professionals then digitally analyze this virtual model and design the metallic partial denture frameworks using specialized computer software. Once the design is finalized, a wax pattern of the framework is either milled or 3D printed. Then proceeding with this wax pattern to fabricate the final metal partial denture framework, either by conventional casting process, or milling of the metallic framework
Conventional metallic partial denture frameworks
Other intervention
The metallic partial denture frameworks have proven to be affordable and convenient treatment option for partially dentate patients for it is rigidity and durability. It can be used in thin sections and provide high strength and stiffness. However, metallic partial denture frameworks also come with several drawbacks. A significant concern for some patients is the metallic display, which can lead to poor esthetics. Other disadvantages include increased prosthesis weight, a potential metallic taste, and a tendency for plaque accumulation. Additionally, they can induce stresses on the abutment teeth

Treatment groups

22 Participants

are divided into 2 treatment groups

Group A: CAD/CAM metallic partial denture frameworksExperimental treatment 1 intervention

Group B: Conventional metallic partial denture frameworksActive comparator 1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

Abutment health mobility

Periotest, Periotest value (PTV) which ranges from -8 to +50

Time frame

3 months

Secondary outcomes

Gingival bleeding index

Löe and Silness Gingival Index (GI), GI scale (scores) 0 -3 (with 0 being normal and 3 being severe inflammation)

Time frame

3 months

Other outcomes

Occlusal Analysis

OccluSense Device, Force distribution per tooth

Time frame

3 months

Locations

This trial has no locations.

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.

Cairo University

Lead sponsor

Source ClinicalTrials.gov

This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options: