Precision Attachment System Incorporated in A Pier Abutment Situation – A Case Report
Life Sciences- Dentistry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22376/ijlpr.2023.13.6.L456-L461Keywords:
Fixed dental prosthesis, Attachments, Precision Attachment, Pier abutment, non-rigid connectorAbstract
In fixed prosthodontics, issues arise when dealing with certain situations, such as pier and tilted abutments, as rigid connectorsmay not be suitable. Pier abutments are terminal between natural teeth, supporting fixed or removable dental prostheses. FPDconnectors are components that connect the retainer and pontic. This study aimed to optimize retention and address long-spanedentulism adjacent to the pier abutment. The patient's medical history was not significant, but their dental history revealed extractionof a severely decayed left maxillary second premolar and first and second molars two years ago. A conventional eight-unit FPD withrigid connectors was placed, but it dislodged multiple times within two years. Rigid connectors in this situation would cause the pierabutment to act as a fulcrum due to tooth movement, arch position, and retainer retention. A non-rigid connector was incorporatedinto the fixed dental prosthesis to address this issue. The use of a non-rigid connector is preferred in constructing an FPD with a pierabutment was the aim of this study. The methodology followed was by placing the keyway on the distal side of the pier abutment aidsin seating the key and reducing the risk of dislodgment. Placing the keyway too close to the pier abutment can loosen the key, potentiallydamaging the canine retainer or causing bone loss around the canine abutment. Non-rigid connectors transfer less stress to abutmentsand allow for physiologic tooth movement. The design and passive fit of non-rigid connectors are crucial for the success of a long-spanFPD. The appropriate connector type is selected during prosthesis construction to prevent separation and failure of the FPD. A nonrigid connector enables movement within the FPD and distributes pressures away from the pier abutment. Therefore, selecting the rightarchitectural design, such as using a key and keyway, holds paramount importance in pier abutment scenarios and plays a crucial role inthe overall effectiveness of the Fixed Partial Denture (FPD) treatment. This case study intends to delve into applying a key and keywayas a flexible connector for restoring a patient dealing with a pier abutment condition.
References
Jain R, Aggarwal S. Precision attachments- An overview. IP Ann Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2017;3:6-9.
Rami D, Sethuraman R, Parmar V, et al. Non-rigid connectors in fixed prosthodontics: a stress breaker for pier abutment. Int J Sci Res. epub ahead of print March 2020;9. doi: 10.36106/ijsr.
Nisal S, Banik M, Gade J, et al. Management of pier abutment using Non-rigid connector: A case report. J Int Oral Health;2.
Sivakumar S. Management of partial edentulism using nonrigid connectors as a treatment modality: A case report. Cureus. 2020;12(4):e7790. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7790, PMID 32461861.
Venkataraman K, Krishna R. The lone standing abutment: A case report. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2016;2:20-3.
Banerjee S, Khongshei A, Gupta T, Banerjee A. Non-rigid connector: the wand to allay the stresses on abutment. Contemp Clin Dent. 2011;2(4):351-4. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.91802, PMID 22346166.
Begum F, Uthappa MA, Salagundi BS, Rupesh PL, Kataraki B, Abraham S. Maxillary fixed-fixed FPD with precision attachment: A clinical report. JMDR. 2020;5(1):49-55. doi: 10.38138/JMDR/v5i1.9.
Mishra A, Palaskar J, Madhav V, et al. Pier abutment: break the stress. 2016;2:126-8.
Shillingburg H, Hobo S, Whitsett L, et al. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 1997.
Oruc S, Eraslan O, Tukay HA, Atay A. Stress analysis of effects of nonrigid connectors on fixed partial dentures with pier abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(3):185-92. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60042-6, PMID 18319089.
Rosenstiel SF, MF, et al. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. St Louis: Mosby Inc; 2001.
Ravikumar A. Non-rigid connector for managing pier abutment in FPD: A case report. JCDR. epub ahead of print 2014. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/9710.4572.
Markley MR. Broken-stress principle and design in fixed bridge prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent. 1951;1(4):416-23. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(51)90027-3, PMID 14851319.
Botelho MG, Dyson JE. Long-span, fixed-movable, resin-bonded fixed partial dentures: a retrospective, preliminary clinical investigation. Int J Prosthodont. 2005;18(5):371-6. PMID 16220800.
Badwaik P, Pakhan A. Non-rigid connectors in fixed prosthodontics: current concepts with a case report. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2005;5(2):99. doi: 10.4103/0972-4052.16879.
Malone WFP, Koth DL, Cavazos E, et al. Tylman’s theory and practice of fixed prosthodontics. 8th ed, reprint. St Louis: Ishiyako EuroAmerica; 2001.
Sutherland JK, Holland GA, Sluder TB, White JT. A photoelastic analysis of the stress distribution in bone supporting fixed partial dentures of rigid and nonrigid design. J Prosthet Dent. 1980;44(6):616-23. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(80)90457-6, PMID 7003121.
Standlee JP, Caputo AA. Load transfer by fixed partial dentures with three abutments. Quintessence Int. 1988;19(6):403-10. PMID 3077679.
Savion I, Saucier CL, Rues S, Sadan A, Blatz M. The pier abutment: a review of the literature and a suggested mathematical model. Quintessence Int. 2006;37(5):345-52. PMID 16683681.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Aditee Apte, Seema Sathe (Kambala), Rewa Kawade

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.