Switch to Dark theme

References

Basker RM, Davenport JC, Thomason JM, 5th edn. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2011
Bamias A, Kastritis E, Bamia C, Moulopoulos LA, Melakopoulos I, Bozas G Osteonecrosis of the jaw in cancer after treatment with bisphosphonates: incidence and risk factors. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23:(34)8580-8587
Reuther T, Schuster T, Mende U, Kübler A Osteoradionecrosis of the jaws as a side effect of radiotherapy of head and neck tumour patients – a report of a thirty year retrospective review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 32:(3)289-295
The windowed partial denture: application of an elastomeric retention technique. QJDT. 2006; 4:(4)256-264
Murata H, Taguchi N, Hamada T, Kawamura M, McCabe JF Dynamic viscoelasticity of soft liners and masticatory function. J Dent Res. 2002; 81:(2)123-128
Gronet PM, Driscoll CF, Hondrum SO Resiliency of surface-sealed temporary soft denture liners. J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77:(4)370-374
Hekimoglu C, Anil N The effect of accelerated ageing on the mechanical properties of soft denture lining materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1999; 26:(9)745-748
Pavan S, dos Santos PH, Filho JN, Spolidorio DM Colonisation of soft lining materials by micro-organisms. Gerodontology. 2010; 27:(3)211-216
Rickman LJ, Padipatvuthikul P, Satterthwaite JD Contemporary denture base resins: Part 2. Dent Update. 2012; 39:176-187
Sofreliner Tough, Tokuyama.

The windowed partial denture: an elastomeric retention technique in patients with lone-standing teeth

From Volume 43, Issue 2, March 2016 | Pages 196-197

Authors

Ahmed Alhilou

StR/ACF

Restorative Department, Leeds Dental Institute, The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK

Articles by Ahmed Alhilou

James Chesterman

Restorative Department, Leeds Dental Institute, The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK

Articles by James Chesterman

Peter Nixon

BChD(Hons), MFDS RCSEd, MDentSci, FDS(Rest Dent), RCSEd

Consultant, Restorative Department, Leeds Dental Institute, The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK

Articles by Peter Nixon

Article

A removable prosthesis relies greatly on active retention, through the use of clasping elements into undercuts and the utilization of guide planes. Retention is defined as the resistance of displacement along the path of insertion. Various factors influence a patient's satisfaction with a removable prosthesis, which include technical quality of the prosthesis, patient's previous denture-wearing experience and patient-related factors such as the denture-bearing area.1

In challenging patients with an unfavourable pattern of tooth loss, medically compromised or oncology patients with altered anatomy, alternative techniques may be required to retain a prosthesis since conventional methods of retention may be inadequate. The responsible clinician is often presented with a dilemma when lone-standing teeth are present. The decision whether to extract or retain any lone-standing teeth in a patient who requires rehabilitation with a removable partial denture needs to be carefully assessed. Various factors ought to be considered during treatment planning:

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

Already have an account? Sign in here