Retention of a posterior resin-bonded fixed partial denture with a modified design: an in vitro study.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to test in vitro the resistance of a modified resin-bonded fixed partial denture (RBFPD) to detachment using a laboratory setup simulating load fatigue of mastication forces. The effect of varying the cement type was also investigated.


METHODS
Extracted teeth were used to prepare specimens each consisting of a premolar and a molar with a space equivalent to a molar in between. Five test groups were prepared (n = 7). Specimens in group 1 were prepared to receive conventional RBFPDs with proximal grooves, occlusal rests, and lingual wings. Specimens in groups 2 and 3 were prepared to receive modified RBFPDs with retentive-slot restorations. Specimens in group 4 were prepared to receive RBFPDs with retentive-slot restorations only, whereas specimens in group 5 were prepared similarly to the ones in groups 2 and 3 but with inlay preparations instead of the retentive slots. Castings were made and their fit surfaces microetched. In groups 1, 2, 4, and 5 castings were cemented with Cement-It, whereas castings of group 3 were cemented with Panavia 21. Slot cavities of groups 2, 3, and 4 were restored with a resin composite. Specimens were subjected to compressive load cycling for 230,000 cycles at 4 Hz under water. Castings were then separated from the abutments under tensile loading.


RESULTS
Mean separation forces were: group 1 = 361 N, group 2 = 525 N, group 3 = 562 N, group 4 = 449 N, and group 5 = 417 N. Groups 2 and 3 had significantly higher mean separation forces than groups 1 and 5. Separation of castings in groups 2 and 3 was associated with a higher frequency of cohesive fracture of the abutments than in group 1. Adhesive failure was uncommon among specimens of groups 2, 3, and 4.


CONCLUSIONS
The modified RBFPDs of groups 2 and 3 had better potential for retention. Increased resistance to dislodgment of the modified RBFPDs was not directly related to the surface area of the castings, nor was it related to the type of resin cement, but rather to mechanical interlocking of the castings with the retentive-slot resin composite restorations.
el-Mowafy
O
O
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, 124 Edward Street, Ontario, M5G 1G6 Canada. oel.mowafy@utoronto.ca
Rubo
M H
MH
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001641:Bicuspid; D019245:Compressive Strength; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D003779:Denture Design; D003781:Denture Retention; D016379:Denture, Partial, Fixed, Resin-Bonded; D006801:Humans; D008409:Mastication; D019563:Mechanics; D008963:Molar; D019279:Resin Cements; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D013718:Tensile Strength
D019279:Resin Cements