Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT07215208

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

No phase Interventional Occlusion Prosthesis Durability

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: CAD/CAM metallic partial denture frameworks, Conventional metallic partial denture frameworks.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Occlusion, Prosthesis Durability. Basic parameters: No limits · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Abutment Health and Occlusal Analysis of CAD-CAM and Conventional Metallic Partial Denture Framework in Mandibular Kenedy Class III Cases: A Randomized Cross Over Clinical Trial

Overview

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

Detailed description

Traditional metallic partial dentures with cobalt-chromium frameworks and clasps considered a reliable choice because they're affordable, durable and have a resistance to distortion. However, the fabrication of traditional metallic partial dentures involves several manual steps, like pouring of the stone casts, surveying the hard tissue and soft tissue undercuts to choose the best path of insertion, and meticulously waxing each component (major and minor connectors, rests, clasps, and denture base retainers) directly onto the cast. This hands-on process can result in some fabrication errors, which by in turn can increase the stresses on the teeth supporting the denture (abutments) and even other non-abutment teeth.

CAD/CAM technology is increasingly being used for the fabrication of metallic partial denture frameworks; it has been highlighting in several investigations. The workflow starts with an intra oral digital scan of the oral cavity, to generate a 3D digital model, that allows for electronic surveying. The metallic partial denture frameworks are then designed virtually using specialized software, after which a wax pattern is created by milling or rapid prototyping. Then the wax pattern would be casted conventionally into metallic partial denture frameworks. The key advantages are simplifying the fabrication process, enhance the accuracy of fit, and reduce the stresses on abutment teeth, significant time savings, and reduction of the potential errors inherent in traditional multi-step lab procedures

Interventions

  • Other CAD/CAM metallic partial denture frameworks
    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 mi
  • Other Conventional metallic partial denture frameworks
    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 tast

Primary outcome measures

  • Abutment health mobility [Time frame: 3 months]
Secondary outcome measures (1)
  • Gingival bleeding index [Time frame: 3 months]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • 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.

Exclusion criteria

  • 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.
  • Systematic disease affecting bone and periodontal health.
  • Insufficient inter-arch space.
  • Patients with physical disabilities that could affect follow up.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: Yes

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Crossover
Masking
Triple blind
Primary purpose
Treatment

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07215208 · Abutment analysis CAD-CAM

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗