Attachments In Prosthodontics

Attachments In Prosthodontics
Guided By:-
Dr. Manish Chadha
(Senior Lecturer)
Presented By:-
Dr. Soham Prajapati
18-7-15
1/120Attachments In Prosthodontics

CONTENTS
• INTRODUCTION
• DEFINITION AND SYNONYMS OF ATTACHMENTS
• HISTORY
• CLASSIFICATION
• INDICATIONS / APPLICATIONS OF ATTACHMENTS
• CONTRAINDICATIONS
• ADVANTAGES
• DISADVANTAGES
• SELECTION OF THE ABUTMENT TEETH
Attachments In Prosthodontics 2/120

CONTENTS
• REQUIREMENT OF THE ABUTMENT TEETH
• SELECTION OF THE RETAINER
• SELECTION OF THE ATTACHMENT
• INTRACORONAL ATTACHMENTS
• EXTRACORONAL ATTACHMENTS
• ROLE OF ATTACHMENT AS STRESS BREAKERS
• BAR ATTACHMENTS
• STUD ATTACHMENTS
• MAGNETS AS ATTACHMENT

CONTENTS
• AUXILLARY ATTACHMENTS
• MAXILLOFACIAL ATTACHMENTS
• CONCLUSION
• REFERENCES

Introduction
• Many edentulous patients experience
problems with their dentures or removable
partial dentures, especially lack of stability
and retention, together with a decrease of
chewing ability.

Definition
• Attachment
– A mechanical device for the fixation,
retention, and stabilization of a
prosthesis.
– A retainer consisting of a metal
receptacle and a closely fitting part;
the former, the female (matrix)
component, is usually contained
within the normal or expanded
contours of the crown of the
abutment tooth and the latter, the
male (patrix) component, is
attached to a pontic or the denture
framework.
The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms, 8th Edition J Prosthet Dent 2005;81:63.

• Stud devices are among the simplest of all attachments. The
male part of the unit consists of a stud shaped projection
soldered to the diaphram of a dowel-retained restoration: the
female part fits over the male unit and is embedded within the
denture base of the prosthesis.
Preiskel, HW. in: Precision attachments in prosthodontics: overdentures and
telescopic prostheses. Volume 2. : Quintessence, Chicago; 1985:125-137

• There are few system which work in reverse.
In these units, the male section projects from
the denture base and engages the female unit
that forms part of the root surface
preparation.
Preiskel, HW. in: Precision attachments in prosthodontics: overdentures and
telescopic prostheses. Volume 2. : Quintessence, Chicago; 1985:125-137

Clasps vs. Attachments
CLASPS:
• Less expensive.
• 5 to 6 year life.
• 30% loss of retention.
• Poor chewing
efficiency.
• 93% caries rate.
• 50% compliance.
ATTACHMENTS:
•More expensive.
•15 year + life.
• 99% retention.
• Excellent chewing
efficiency.
• 8% caries rate.
• 100% compliance.

Removable Partial Dentures
Periodontal Status
RPD’s WERE ASSOCIATED WITH
• Increased periodontal pathology
• Increased plaque and tarter accumulation
• Increased gingival inflammation
• Increased probing depths
• Increased recession
• Increased abutment tooth mobility
Zlataric’ et.al., The Effect of Removable Partial Dentures on Periodontal Health
of Abutment and Non-Abutment Teeth. JPeriodontology, 2002, 73: 137-144

History
1. Winder
“Winders design”
Screw joint retention
2. Parr (1886)
Extracoronal socket attachment

History
Stair
Telescopic abutment restoration
Ash 1912
Split bar attachment system

Dr. Herman E.S.
“T shaped”
Precision Attachment (1906)
“H shaped”
Chayes Attachment
(1912)

Direct retainers
• Designed to replace occlusal rest, bracing arm, and retaining arm
of the conventional clasp retained partial denture.
• Function to retain, support and stabilize the removable partial
denture.

SYNONYMS OF ATTACHMENTS
Patrix Matrix
Flange Slot
Insert Crypt
Key Keyway
Fitting part Receptacle
Internal attachments
Frictional attachments
Parallel attachments
Slotted attachments
Key and Key way attachments
Male attachments Female attachments

CLASSIFICATION OF ATTACHMENTS
1.Based on method of fabrication and the tolerance of fit
I. Precision attachment (prefabricated types)
I. Semiprecision attachment (custom made / laboratory made)
Prefabricated wax / plastic / nylon patternsAttachments In Prosthodontics 21/120

What is a Precision Attachment?
• An attachment that is fabricated from milled alloys
• Tolerances are within .01mm
Precision Attachments
They are Generally
• Intracoronal/Extracoronal
• Rigid = NonResilient

What is a Semi-Precision Attachment?
An attachment that is fabricated by the direct casting of
plastic, wax, metal, or refractory patterns.
Their method of fabrication
subjects them to
inconsistencies .

2. According to their relationship to the abutment teeth
Intracoronal (Internal attachment) Extracoronal (External attachment)

3. Based on stiffness of the resulting joint
Rigid attachments Resilient attachments (Non rigid)

 Based on stiffness of the resulting joint
Rigid attachments

4. Based primarily on the function of the attachments (Feinberg
in 2002):
1. Rigid: Any attachment employing a mechanical locking action
with the use of clasps, lingual arms, springs, ball and sockets
etc. The removable partial denture is held firmly in place and
the abutment teeth are subjected to all of the forces in the
mouth at all times.
2. Passive: An attachment that provides a free movement of the
male when the abutment teeth are exposed to excessive
forces. Such a passive retention mechanism has the effect of
an automatic stress- breaker.

5. Based on geometric configuration and design of the attachment
 Key and Keyway
 Interlocks
 Ball and socket
 Bar and clip
 Hinge
 Telescopic
 Latch
 Screw units

6. Classification by M.C. Mensor (1973) :
Classification according to shape, design and primary area of
utilization of attachment.
Coronal Radicular Accessory
Intracoronal
Extracoronal
Telescope studs (pressure
buttons)
Bar attachment
(Bar joints and Bar units)
Auxillary
Screw units
Bar connectors
Bolts
Stabilizers
Balances
Interlocks

7. Gerardo Beccera and Michael MacEntee
(1987)
Intradental attachments
- Frictional
- Magnetic
Extradental attachments
- Cantilever attachment
- Bar attachment

Khare, Amit, Sumit Makkar, and T. Roshna. "Full mouth rehabilitation with fixed and removal
prosthesis using extracoronal attachments: A clinical report." (2011).

Khare, Amit, Sumit Makkar, and T. Roshna. "Full mouth rehabilitation with fixed and removal
prosthesis using extracoronal attachments: A clinical report." (2011).
Frictional Mobile

ADVANTAGES
1. Improved esthetics and elevated psychological acceptance
2. Mechanical advantage
- Direct the forces along the long axis of the teeth
- Force application closer to the fulcrum of the tooth
• Reduces non axial loading
• Decreases torquing forces
• Rotational movement of the abutment

3. In Distal extension base cases –
 Reduced stress to the abutment
 Allow rotational/vertical movement of denture base
4. Cross arch load transfer and prosthesis stabilization
5. Compared to conventional clasp retained partial denture
• Less liable to fracture
• Less bulky and more esthetics
• Better retention and stability

DISADVANTAGES
1. Complexity of design, procedures for fabrication &
clinical treatment
2. Minimum occlusogingival abutment height (4-6mm)
• To incorporate attachment without overcontouring
3. Anatomy of the tooth – Limited faciolingual tooth width
(incisor and canine areas)
4. Expensive
• Complexity of laboratory and clinical procedure
• Attachment maintenance (repair or periodic replacement)
5. Wearing of attachment components

6. Require high technical expertise
7. Requires aggressive tooth preparation
8. Cooperation and manual dexterity on the part of the patient
• Difficult to insert and remove
9. Increase demand on oral hygiene performance

INDICATIONS / APPLICATIONS OF PRECISION
ATTACHMENTS
Indication of the attachment according to Sherring & Martin
(1994) are:
Fixed bridgework- Intracoronal attachment on non parallel
abutments
Partial Denture
Overdentures
Unilateral or bilateral free end denture.
Sherring LM, Martin P: Attachment for prosthetic dentistry introduction and
application; In: What is an Attachment; Quintessence Publishing Co Ltd,
London, 1994;pp.11-12.

INDICATIONS / APPLICATIONS OF PRECISION
ATTACHMENTS
Removable Prosthodontics
 As a retainer in tooth supported removable partial denture
 For esthetic concern in the anterior part of the mouth
 Stress Breakers – Free end saddles/Distal Extension Base cases (DEB)
– When cantilevered pontic is to be used as abutment
 Periodontal involvement of the tooth
 Contraindicates rigid FPDs
 Most efficient bilateral bracing and support are essential
 Divergent abutment teeth with high survey lines – parallel path
of placement.

 As a retainers in tooth supported overdenture
 For movable joints in sectional denture
Fixed Prosthodontics
 As a connector in long span bridges
 To overcome alignment problems where abutments have
differing path of withdrawal.

Implant Prosthodontics
 Implant supported overdenture
 Connection between tooth and implant

Retention
Intraoral retention Extraoral retention
Anatomical Mechanical Anatomical Mechanical
Temporary Permanent - Eye glasses
- S.S. wire - Clasps - Magnets
- Clasps - Precision attachment - Buttons
- Preformed - Overlay, Swing-lock - Adhesives
Bands/crowns - adhesives - Implants
etc. - Magnets etc.
- Implants etc.
Combination of above

CONTRAINDICATIONS OF PRECISION ATTACHMENT
• Poor oral hygiene habits
• Abnormally high caries rate
• Poor periodontal support
• Poor crown to root ratio
• Inadequate space / room to employ the
attachment
• Compromised endodontic and restorative
conditions

SELECTION OF THE ABUTMENT TEETH
Factors :
Sound abutment teeth
Number of the abutment teeth
Location of the abutment teeth
Periodontal condition – Crown : root ratio
– Periodontal support
Pulpal status – Vitality of the pulp
– Size of the pulp chamber

Minimum attachment length
4mm
Inadequate attachment
length < 4mm
Maximum attachment
length 6-7 mm
• Axial space requirement
Sufficient clinical crown length – for minimum of 4mm attachment length
Adequate space between the pulp
and the normal contour of the tooth
Buccolingual space requirement
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ABUTMENT TEETH

SELECTION OF THE TYPE OF RETAINER
Full crown retainers
Intracoronal attachments
More retentive / rigid
Ideal contours
Caries protection
Partial coverage retainers
Kennedy’s Cl III partial
denture
Splinted abutment teeth
Most vulnerable
Inadequate retention
Marginal leakage
Inlays / onlays / pin ledges
Not used for intracoronal attachments
Lack of retention
Marginal caries

SELECTION OF THE ATTACHMENTS
Intracoronal
vs
Extracoronal
Resilient
vs
Non resilient
75 mm in length
Red  3-4 mm
Yellow  5-6 mm
Black  7-8 mm
EM attachment gauge - Matsuo (1970)

EM attachment selector -Dr. MC Mensor (1973)
Quick reference
Communication between the dentist
& laboratory technician
105 attachments
30 points of information

INTRACORONAL ATTACHMENTS
Precision attachment
(prefabricated type)
Semiprecision attachments
(custom made)
Conventional attachment
T shaped attachments
Modern attachment
H shaped attachments
Contact plate
Adjustment slot
Tube
Head
Reinforcing
plate

MECHANICS OF RETENTION
Frictional : Preiskel group I
Retention – Surface area contact b/w components
Function of the length – Controlled by height of clinical crown
– Intermaxillary space available
Function of cross sectional dimensions
Mechanical : Preiskel group II
Auxillary mechanical retentive features
Eg : Spring loaded plunger / clips

Passive Attachment :
Matrix : Simple channels closed at one end to provide stop
Patrix : Solid slide
Channels of passive attachment may be round / elliptical slides
DEPENDING ON ARTICULAR RETENTION
Active attachment Locked precision attachment
Omega Beyeler
Passive attachment

ACTIVE ATTACHMENT
Active friction grip attachment Active snap grip attachments
Locked precision attachment
Attachments bolted by means of a sliding bolt or latch
Pinned or screwed together
McCollum
(split patrix)
Crismani
Latch retainedAttachments In Prosthodontics 51/120

Mc Collum attachment :
H shaped attachment
Single adjustment slot
Retention  expanding the adjustment slot

Stern attachment
Stern latch retained
Two adjustment slots

Crismani attachment :
Rigid / Resilient
Rigid Crismani attachment
 Frictional grip
 Mechanical  Spring clip

Ney’s attachment :
Latch retainedStandard
(Conventional
H shaped)
No. 6 & 9
Ney loc split
lingual
(Wide reinforcing
plate)

Bakers attachment
Male – skirt (unique feature)
Schatzmann attachment
(Dovetail)
Frictional retention
Mechanical retention
(spring loaded plunger & coil spring)

SEMIPRECISION ATTACHMENTS
Acc. to GPT 8 - “Laboratory fabricated rigid metallic extension
(patrix) of a fixed or removable dental prosthesis that fits into a slot
type keyway (matrix) in a cast restoration allowing some movement
between the components ”
Semiprecision rest – intracoronal rest seat and resilient lingual arm.
Gillete (1923) : First semiprecision attachment
Rectangular deep rest with buccal and lingual wrought clasp arms
Ira D Zinner (1979)
Locking semiprecision
attachment
Non locking semiprecision
attachment

Louis Blatterfein (1969) : Four aspects of rest seat preparation
Occlusal form / outline form – controls amount of rotation
Circular Dove tail RectangularMortice
(Rigid – locking type) ResilientSome resiliency
(locking type)
Proximal form / side walls – lateral force control
Parallel outline Tapering outline (stress relief)
The angle b/w the proximal wall & the gingival floor -rigidity
(Non-locking type)

Gingival floor form : serves the function of reciprocation
Flat Inclined Channeled
Added
reciprocation
Mortice occlusal
form
Rectangular
occlusal form

Advantages :
 Versatility for clinical situations – employing various rest seat
outline forms.
 Variation in tooth size and shapes are easily accommodated.
 Better crown contour compared to prefabricated type
Disadvantages :
 Long term wear is more – softness of alloy used.
 No standardization of sizing : Lack of interchangeability of
male and female attachment.
 Greater degree of laboratory skill and attention in detail.

PROCEDURE
PREPARATION OF ABUTMENT TEETH

PLACEMEMT OF FEMALE ATTACHMENT

RPD FRAMEWORK

MALE ATTACHMENT

EXTRACORONAL ATTACHMENTS
Introduced by Henry R. Boos (1900)
Modified by F Ewing Roach (1908)
Applications
Kennedy’s class I and class II
Boitel (1978)
 Rigid attachments
 Resilient attachments
 Bar attachments

EXTRACORONAL ATTACHMENT
Rigid attachments Hinged attachments
(Stress breaking action)
Resilient attachments
ERA
O-ring
Advantages :
• No alteration of contour of the abutment crown
• Can be used in short abutment teeth
• Greater freedom in the design
• Ease of insertion and removal

Disadvantages (Wolf RE 1980) :
• Lack of occlusal stability
• Bulky
• Rebasing problems
• Improper control of force distribution
• Encroachment on the gingival papilla – use of mini attachment

RIGID EXTRACORONAL ATTACHMENTS
Roach attachment (Ball and tube attachment)
Oldest attachment
Patrix – round ball
Matrix – tube
Pin and tube attachment
Simplest
Patrix – pin
Matrix – tube

Conex attachment
(Smaller version)
Stabilex attachment
Two retention pins
Disadvantage - increased length
MatrixPatrix (convoluted)
Assembled
Two types of pins
Frictional retention
Mechanical locking

RESILIENT EXTRA CORONALATTACHMENT
• Dalbo / Dallabona attachment
Assembled
a) Patrix
b) Matrix

Dalbo stress breaker
Rotational and Vertical movement
Matrix and patrix

Ceka attachment
Developed by Karl Cluytens (1951)
Two types - Ceka NV attachment
- Ceka Revax
Matrix  metal ring retainer Patrix  Attachment pin
(split metal post)Attachments In Prosthodontics 72/120

Functional aspect : Mark E Waltz 1973
A) Support
B) Bracing
C) Retention
Attachment pin / split post
• Insertion and removal
• Reduces frictional wear
Ceka Revax

ROLE OFATTACHMENTS AS STRESS BREAKER
Rigid system Non-rigid system
Mensor  stress can only be selected, altered or blocked
“Stress director”

Shohet (1969) , Kratochvil (1981)
Low intensity forces on abutment teeth in contrast to rigid
attachments.
Rationale of stress breaker  movement should be restricted
only to displaceable tissue
Disadvantages of stress director :
 More complex, increased wear and breakage
 Increased bone resorption and trauma
 Spring like device  tendency to fatigue

ASC-52
attachment
Extracoronal resilient attachment
Patrix and Matrix
STRESS BREAKER DESIGNS

Neys distal extension
stress breaker
Crismani resilient
attachment
“Hinge stress breaker”

Extracoronal resilient attachment (ERA) :
Colour coded retention caps
Most flexible White > Orange > Blue > Gray Most rigid
Two types of ERA
 Standard
 Reduce vertical (ERA – RV) – male part is 0.5mm shorter

Matrix Patrix
Use of ERA in
DEB cases
Use in over denture
Yen Chen Ku et al (2000) : ERA provides esthetics, vertical
resiliency, easy replacement of worn dentures
 Vertical resiliency of 0.4mm
 Universal hinge joint action

O-SO ring / O-ring attachment
Patrix - post with the groove
or undercut.
Matrix – O-ring synthetic
polymer gaskets + encapsulator
O-ring are made up of
Silicone
Nitrile
Fluorocarbon
Ethylene propylene
ERA , Overdentures & implants

Advantages of O-ring
• Ease in changing the attachment
• Wide range of movement
• Low cost
• Different degrees of retention
• Elimination of the time / cost of the superstructure

STUD ATTACHMENTS (ANCHORS)
“Anchor the roots”
Simplest of all the attachment
Patrix – dowel / post retained restoration
Matrix – denture base of the prosthesis
Classified as :
 Rigid stud unit
 Resilient stud unit
 Extraradicular units
 Intraradicular units
Extraradicular IntraradicularAttachments In Prosthodontics 82/120

Space requirement - intermediate between
dome shaped coping and thimble shaped
coping.
Place parallel to the long axis of the tooth.

DALBO STUD ATTACHMENT
Rigid unit
Ball and socket unit
(Vertical and
rotational movement)
Nylon ring – protects the lamella
 Retention – altering the positions of
free ends of the lamella

ROTHERMAN ECCENTRIC ATTACHMENT
Button shaped attachment
Patrix – eccentric cylinder
with undercut or groove
Matrix – Clip or clasp arm
Adv. – less space, easy to use
Activation : Bending the clasp
arm towards center
Resilient unit
Rigid units

ZEST ANCHOR ATTACHMENT
Patrix
Polyethylene – Nylon stud
Matrix
Funnel shaped tube
Instrumentation kit
Advantages :
 Reduces vertical space
requirement
 Forces transferred more
apically.
Intraradicular

GERBER ATTACHMENT
Resilient Gerber Rigid Gerber
Largest of the stud unit
Resilient – spring controlled
vertical plane
Patrix – threaded post
Matrix – retention spring and ring
Disadvantages :
Complex attachment system
Requires more space
Permits little rotation

CEKAATTACHMENT
Ceka revax
Extra radicular Intra radicular
Matrix – metal ring
Patrix – attachment pin
(split metal post)

SPACER RING
Vertical movement of the
prosthesis

SCHUBIGER ATTACHMENT
Patrix : threaded post / screw
Matrix : recessed collar, cap nut / lock nut
Indication – Diverged roots
Cut section

BAR ATTACHMENTS
Gilmore clip system (1913) - metal bar with retaining sleeve / clip.
Bar can be attached to the :
 Coping or crowns over the vital teeth
 Post coping on endodontically treated teeth
 Screwed down into the coping (implant system)
Types of bar attachments :
 Dolder bar
 Ackermann’s bar
 CM rider bar
 Hader bar
 Andrews bar
 Customised bar

Two groups of bar attachments :
1) Bar units – rigid
2) Bar joints – permits rotation
Round / circular Oval / egg shaped ‘U’ shaped /
parallel sided bars
Multiple sleeve bar jointsSingle sleeve bar joints
Depending on cross section -
BAR JOINTS

DOLDER BAR
Egg shaped bar in cross section
Open sided sleeve
Two sizes 3.5mm x 1.6mm,
3.0mm x 2.2mm
Spacer – degree of movement
(vertical & rotational)

Advantages :
• Excellent retention , stability & support
• Cross arch stabilization
Disadvantages :
• Increased bulk
• Plaque accumulation
• Soldering necessary
• Wearing

HADER BAR
Helmut Hader in 1960
Available as a prefabricated plastic pattern
Notable feature
 Resin / plastic sleeve
 No spacer- more
support & retention
English, Donnel & Staubli (1992)
Hader EDS system
System with 3mm height (8.3mm).

Clips with metal encapsulator
Advantages :
 Prefabricated plastic pattern – no need for soldering.
 Precise fit, simplicity, versatility

ACKERMANN BAR
Available in different cross
sections
Circular cross section – can
be bent in all planes

CM RIDER BAR
 Made up of precious / semiprecious alloy
 Retention tags in long axis of the bar – relocation
 Sleeves – short & long
Disadvantage – More buccolingual space

Advantages of bar attachments :
 Rigidly splint the teeth
 Provides good retention, stability and support
 Provides cross arch stabilization
 Positioned close to the alveolar bone (exhibit less leverage)
Disadvantages :
 Bulk of bar
 Plaque accumulation
 Wearing
 Soldering procedure
 Manual dexterity

MAGNETS AS ATTACHMENT
Since 1950 To retain maxillofacial prosthesis
Al, Ni, Fe, Co alloy (alnico)
Limited use – larger size
1960 “use of rare earth element” – High field strength
– Can be used in smaller size.
Samarium cobalt (Sm-Co) (Joseph Becker Hoffer 1967)
Neodymium iron boron (Nd-Fe-B) – 20% stronger
Samarium iron nitride – High magnetization
Uses - retention of mandibular overdentures (tooth and implant
supported over dentures)

Gilling’s magnetic attachment
(cobalt samarium alloy magnets)
“Split pole paired magnets”
Closed field magnetic system
• Magnetic retainer with magnets
• Magnetic keeper

Encapsulated magnetic retainer
and magnetic keeper
Assembled attachment
SANDWICH DESIGN

Advantages of magnetic attachment :
 Smaller size and strong attractive force
 Produce constant force – constant retention
 Easy to incorporate into the prosthesis
 Automatic reseating
 Boon for elderly patients (Parkinsonism, arthritic patient)
 Less lateral force to the abutment tooth

Disadvantages :
 Loss of retention due to corrosion or heat instability
 Requires encapsulation within inert alloys
 Cant be repaired
 High cost
 Limited force transmission - Magnets can slide on their keepers.

AUXILLARY ATTACHMENTS
 Screw and tube attachment
 Key and keyway / interlocks
 PressoMatic or Isoclip
 Bar connectors
 Attachments for sectional dentures / bolts
Screw and tube attachment
head
collar
tube

Indications :
Overcome alignment problems
Connecting one restoration of fixed partial denture to another
Allowing the removal of long span fixed partial denture for
repair and examination of abutment.

ATTACHMENT USED FOR SECTIONAL DENTURES
Two part dentures : One part - chrome cobalt base
Second part - removable acrylic flange with teeth
Advantage - superior esthetics and improved retention
Method of union :
Physical interference : Bolt retained prosthesis
Frictional resistance : Split post retained prosthesis

Maxillofacial Attachments
PANDEL SPRINGS
MUCOSAL INSERTS
MAGNETS
-USED TO MUTUALLY RETAIN OBTURATOR AND
DENTURE PART

EXTRA-ORAL PROSTHESIS
Most early facial prosthesis relied on mechanical means of
retention.
SPECTACLES –used to retain prosthesis for
nasal and large midfacial defects.

EYE PATCH – used rarely to
retain large facial
prosthesis
MAGNETS- intra-oral and facial
prosthesis are mutually retained by
attractive forces of magnets

LIMITATIONS OF MECHANICAL RETENTIVE
AIDS
 Certain retentive mechanical devices are unpleasing in
appearance such as large eye glass frames.
 Desired retention may not be achieved with the use of
only mechanical devices.
 With the use of magnets, movement of intra-oral
prosthesis while functional movements is transferred to
the extra-oral prosthesis.

CONCLUSION

Various Attachments Brand Names
• Rhein83
• Sterngold Attachments
• Zest Anchor
• CEKA
• 3M

Useful Site & Application
• http://www.dentalcompare.com/Dental-Lab-
Products/4886-Dental-Precision-Attachments/
• Rhein83. Both on (iOS and GooglePlay)

LIST OF REFERENCES
1. Advanced removable partial dentures. James S.
Brudvick Quint Int. Pub Pg. 115-152.
2. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. Rosensteil,
Third edition, Mosby Pub., pg. 543-566.
3. Overdenture made easy - guide to implant and
root supported prosthesis - Harold W. Preiskel –
George Zarb.
4. Precision attachments – a link to successful
restorative treatment - Gareth Jenkins ,Quint
Publishing.

REFERENCES
5. Theory and practice of precision attachment RPD –
James L Baker & Richard J Goodkins.
6. Precision attachments in prosthodontics : overdenture
and telescopic prosthesis volume 2. Quint Pub.
7. Mensor, Merrill C. "Classification and selection of
attachments." The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 29.5
(1973): 494-497.
8. Jacobs, Reinhilde, et al. "Posterior jaw bone
resorption in osseointegrated implant‐supported
overdentures." Clinical oral implants research 3.2
(1992): 63-70.

REFERENCES
9. Ku, Yen-Chen, Yu-Fu Shen, and Chiu-Po Chan. "Extracoronal
resilient attachments in distal-extension removable partial
dentures." Quintessence international (Berlin, Germany:
1985) 31.5 (2000): 311-317.
10. Riley, Melissa Alessandra, Anthony Damien Walmsley, and
Ivor Rex Harris. "Magnets in prosthetic dentistry." The
Journal of prosthetic dentistry 86.2 (2001): 137-142.
11. Langer, Anselm. "Telescope retainers for removable partial
dentures." The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 45.1 (1981):
37-43.
12. Burns, David R., and John E. Ward. "Review of attachments
for removable partial denture design: 1. Classification and
selection." The International journal of prosthodontics 3.1
(1989): 98-102.Attachments In Prosthodontics 118/120

REFERENCES
13.Beumer John Curtis, David Firtell;
Prosthodontic & surgical considerations
14. Chalian A, Drane P; Maxillofacial prosthetic
15.Zlataric’ et.al., The Effect of Removable
Partial Dentures on Periodontal Health of
Abutment and Non-Abutment Teeth.
JPeriodontology, 2002, 73: 137-144

Thank You

Attachments In Prosthodontics

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Attachments In Prosthodontics

Similar to Attachments In Prosthodontics (20)

More from Self employed

More from Self employed (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Attachments In Prosthodontics

Editor's Notes