The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지

CAUSE OF TECHNICAL FAILURES OF CONICAL CROWN-RETAINED DENTURE (CCRD): A CLINICAL REPORT

  • Yi Yang-Jin (Department of prosthodontics and research institute of oral science, College of dentistry, Kangnung National University) ;
  • Cho Lee-Ra (Department of prosthodontics and research institute of oral science, College of dentistry, Kangnung National University) ;
  • Park Chan-Jin (Department of prosthodontics and research institute of oral science, College of dentistry, Kangnung National University)
  • Published : 2003.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Conical crown-retained denture (CCRD) has been used as a very effective treatment method in cases with few remaining teeth with heterogeneous prognosis. However, in spite of many advantages of CCRD, high technical failure rate was a problem to be considered. Incorrect path of insertion and excessive retention were thought to be the main cause of technical failure and to result from laboratory procedure with a coping misfit and/or a coping transfer error. In order to prevent this error, secure anchoring of inner coping and re-examination and milling of convergence angle were recommended on the master model from pick-up impression.

Keywords

References

  1. Molin M, Bergman B, Ericson A. A clinical evaluation of conical crown retained dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70:251-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90060-2
  2. Bergman B, Ericson A, Molin M. Long-term clinical results after treatment with conical crown-retained dentures. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:533-538
  3. Beschnidt SM, Chitmongkolsuk S. Telescopic crown-retained removable partial dentures: review and case report. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2001;22(11):927-934
  4. Hulten J, Tillstrom B, Nilner K. Long term clinical evaluation of conical crown retained dentures. Swed Dent 1993;17:225-234
  5. Igarashi Y, Goto T. Ten-year follow-up study of conical crown-retained dentures. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:149-155
  6. Wagner B, Kern M. Clinical evaluation of removable partial dentures 10 years after insertion: success rates, hygienic problems, and technical failures. Clin Oral Invest 2000;4:74-80 https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840050119
  7. Smidt A. Telescopic restorations in prosthodontics. In: Quitessence of dental technology. Chicago; Quintessence;2000. p.168-179
  8. Hofman E, Behr M, Handel G. Frequency and costs of technical failures of clasp- and double crown-retained removable partial dentures. Clin Oral Invest 2002;6:104-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-002-0160-9
  9. Behr M, Hofman E, Rosentritt M, Lang R, Handel G. Technical failure rates of double crown-retained removable partial dentures. Clin Oral Invest 2000;4:87-90 https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840050121
  10. Saito M, Notani K, Miura Y, Kawasaki T. Complications and failures in removable partial dentures: a clinical evaluation. J Oral Rehabilitat 2002;29:627-633 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00898.x
  11. Wenz HJ, Hertrampf K, Lehmann KM. Clinical longevity of removable partial dentures retained by telescopic crowns: outcome of the double crown with clearance fit. Int J Prosthodont 2001;14:207-213