MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Occlusion of artificial teeth in complete dentures: population-based analysis.
Author: Kordaß B, Quooß A, John D, Ruge S.
Journal: Int J Comput Dent; 2018; 21(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 29610776.
Abstract:
UNLABELLED: Occlusion is a central aspect of all prosthetic restorations, including complete dentures. Within the follow-up (SHIP 1) of the regional population-based "Study of Health in Pomerania" (SHIP), a number of 3300 study participants were examined concerning the occlusion of artificial teeth in purely mucosa and non-implant-borne complete dentures. These subjects were representative of the population. Therefore, occlusal bite registrations obtained in habitual intercuspation (IP) were made and were digitally evaluated with the Greifswald Digital Analyzing System (GEDAS) software based on transparent contact areas. A total of 495 subjects wore such complete dentures, of whom 438 wore maxillary dentures (217 men, 71.3 ± 9.2 years; 221 women, 68.9 ± 9.1 years), and 278 wore mandibular dentures (141 men, 70.4 ± 8.5 years; 137 women, 70.4 ± 8.5 years). The mean number of denture teeth was 13.4 ± 0.89 in the maxilla (of which 6.8 ± 2.77 were in occlusal contact), and 13.3 ± 0.91 in the mandible (of which 6.8 ± 2.97 were in occlusal contact). In general, the premolars (maxilla: 2.8 ± 1.31; mandible: 2.6 ± 1.29 teeth) had more occlusal contact than the molars (maxilla: 2.2 ± 1.24; mandible: 2.3 ± 1.23 teeth). The differences were highly significant, with P < 0.01 in the Wilcoxon test for paired samples. Furthermore, there were distinctions between both sides, with the right side having more posterior teeth in contact than the left side (maxillary right: 2.6 ± 1.18; maxillary left: 2.5 ± 1.14; mandibular right: 2.5 ± 1.13; mandibular left: 2.4 ± 1.13), each significant for the maxilla at P = 0.022 (Wilcoxon test). Here, the number of denture teeth played a role. In dentures with exactly 14 denture teeth (maxillary: n = 301; mandibular: n = 179), there were significantly more molars than premolars in contact in the mandible (premolars: 2.4 ± 1.37; molars: 2.7 ± 1.27; P = 0.026), whereas in the maxilla the ratio of premolars to molars in contact was reversed (premolars: 2.8 ± 1.36; molars: 2.6 ± 1.25); however, the latter difference proved barely significant at just P = 0.099. Women tended to have slightly fewer contact-bearing teeth than men (posteriors in men: 5.1 ± 2.04; in women: 4.9 ± 2.03); the differences were not significant. Nor were there any significant differences between the groups < 70 years (maxillary: n = 189; mandibular: n = 101), and ≥ 70 years (maxillary: n = 249; mandibular: n = 177). The presence of dysfunction of the masticatory system was determined using the Helkimo Index (HI). A value of HI ≥ 2 was regarded as dysfunctional. The groups with and without dysfunctions differed significantly for the number of posterior teeth on the right side of the maxilla (HI ≥ 2: 2.2 ± 1.34; HI < 2: 2.6 ± 1.6; P = 0.041) in the Mann-Whitney U test. The difference in the groups according to HI was found to be slightly significant regarding the number of posteriors (HI ≥ 2: 4.5 ± 2.28; HI < 2: 5.1 ± 2.00; P = 0.063) and molars (HI ≥ 2: 1.9 ± 1.34; HI < 2: 2.3 ± 1.22; P = 0.092) with occlusal contacts. The differences for the mandibular premolars and for the maxillary left posterior teeth were not significant. CONCLUSION: With regard to masticatory system dysfunctions, it makes sense to ensure that there are molar contacts, especially in the maxilla. A tendency to "premolarize" contacts should be counteracted by appropriate measures.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]