Uploaded byApurva Thampi
Major Connectors
The document discusses major connectors used in removable partial dentures, detailing their roles, types, and design requirements for both maxillary and mandibular connectors. It covers various types, including palatal straps, lingual bars, and their indications, advantages, and disadvantages. Recent advancements, such as CAD/CAM technologies in fabrication, are also mentioned alongside a conclusion and references.
More Related Content
Similar to Major Connectors
Major Connectors
- 1. Major Connectors Presented by: Apurva Thampi 1
- 2. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Recent advances Conclusion References 2
- 3. Introduction Name of components– descriptive of function Components Major connectors Minor connector Rests Direct retainer Indirect retainer Denture base 3
- 4. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Recent advances Conclusion References 4
- 5. Major connectors A majorconnector joins the components of the removable partial denture from one side of the arch to the opposite side 5
- 6. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Recent advances Conclusion References 6
- 7. Role of majorconnectors Be rigid Protect the associated soft tissue Provide means for obtaining indirect retention Provide a means of placement of denture base Promote patient comfort Self cleansing 7
- 8. Rigidity : Permits broaddistribution of forces Protect soft tissue: Maxillary connector – 6mm from marginal gingiva Mandibular connector – 3mm from marginal gingiva 8
- 9. Provide means of indirectretention: By use of indirect retainers, rotation around the fulcrum line can be prevented Promote patient comfort: Edges should be contoured 9
- 10. Major connector isbased on the principle of leverage 10 It will limit movement possibilities by acting as a counter-acting lever CROSS-ARCH STABILITY
- 11.
- 12. Requirements of maxillarymajor connectors Borders – 6mm from gingival margins Anterior border should blend with the palatal anatomy Borders should cross the margins at right angles Palatal strap – 8mm wide Open central connectors – medial borders should be located at the junction of horizontal and vertical surfaces 12
- 13. Thickness of theplate should be uniform Borders should be gently curved Intaglio surface should not be highly polished 13
- 14. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Recent advances Conclusion References 14
- 15. Types of Maxillarymajor connectors • Palatal bar • Palatal strap • Antero-posterior palatal bar • Horse-shoe shaped • Antero-posterior palatal strap • Complete palate 6 types of maxillary major connectors 15
- 16.
- 17. Narrow, half oval Thickestpoint at the centre Gentle curved and should not form an angle Indications class III (short span) application 17
- 18. 18 *Palatal bar hasfew advantages and should be avoided *Bulky – causes discomfort to the patient *Narrow antero- posterior width Advantage/Disadvantage
- 19.
- 20. Most versatile Band ofmetal with a thin cross-sectional dimension A-P dimension should not be less than 8mm 20
- 21. Width should beincreased with the length of the edentulous span Indication Kennedy’s class II 21
- 22. 22 *Increased resistance to bendingand twisting forces *can be kept thin *little interference with normal tongue action *increased tissue coverage *Excessive palatal coverage * Anterior border should be positioned posterior to rugae * Prone to papillary hyperplasia Advantage/Disadvantage
- 23.
- 24. Palatal bar +palatal strap 2 bars joined by a flat longitudinal element 24
- 25. Advantage/Disadvantage *Rigid *Minimises soft tissue coverage *Providesexceptional resistance to deformation *Uncomfortable *Bulky *Derives little support from bony tissue *Contraindication – reduced periodontal support 25
- 26.
- 27. Consists of athin band of metal Lingual surface of remaining teeth to palatal tissue – 6-8 mm Should be symmetrical – equal height on both sides 27
- 28. Advantage/Disadvantage *Strong connector *Derives some verticalsupport from tissues of hard palate *Designed to avoid bony prominences Tendency to deform Does not provide cross-arch stabilisation Should be considered only if more rigid connectors cannot be used 28
- 29. Horse shoe majorconnector has a tendency to Flex or deform. Hence it is not a good connector When cross arch stabilization in required. 29
- 30.
- 31. Maximum usage Each strap– 8mm width, thin cross- section Borders – 6mm from gingival margin Posterior strap should not contact soft palate 31
- 32. Advantage/Disadvantage *Derives good support fromhard tissues *L-beam effect – increases resistance to flexure +Extensive length of borders may cause irritation to the tongue 32
- 33.
- 34. Provides ultimate rigidityand support Maximum tissue coverage Must be kept 6mm away from gingival margins Mechanical seal – presence of bead line along posterior border 34
- 35. ADVANTAGES All posterior teethto be replaced Remaining teeth are periodontally compromised Provides vertical support Permits force distribution to the teeth as well as the tissues Comfortable Coverage of multiple planes – L beam effect 35
- 36. DISADVANTAGES Adverse soft tissuereaction may occur – soft tissue hyperplasia – poor oral hygiene and prolonged periods of denture wearing 36
- 37. Indications Case Type ofmajor connector Weak periodontal support Wide palatal strap or complete palate Adequate periodontal support Palatal strap or A-P palatal strap Long-span distal extension A-P palatal strap or complete palate Anterior teeth to be replaced A-P palatal strap, complete palate or horseshoe major connector Presence of torus A-P palatal strap, A-P palatal bar, horse shoe connector 37
- 38. Design of maxillarymajor connectors : Outline primary stress bearing areas Outline non bearing areas Outline of connector areas Selection of connector type Unification 38
- 39. Requirements of mandibular majorconnectors Rigid without being bulky Must not impinge on the movable floor of the mouth Relief required between the rigid metal connector and underlying tissues 39
- 40. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Recent advances Conclusion References 40
- 41. Types of mandibularmajor connectors • Lingual bar • Lingual plate • Double lingual bar • Labial bar 4 types of mandibular major connectors 41
- 42.
- 43. Most frequently used Cross-section– half pear shaped Broadest portion near the floor of the mouth 8mm space between gingival margin and floor of the mouth Presence of mandibular tori – surgical removal 43
- 44. *Minimal contact with remainingteeth *Simple design *Decreased plaque accumulation *Increased soft tissue stimulation *If care is not taken, frame work may not be rigid *Too thin or too flexible – concentration of potentially destructive forces on individual teeth 44
- 45.
- 46. Half pear shaped– this solid piece of metal extending from superior border to lingual surfaces of teeth Lingual border as low as possible - avoid interferences with functional movements Plate must completely close the interproximal surfaces 46
- 47. Superior border isknife-edged to avoid “ledging” Open embrasures or widely spaced teeth – modification – “step back” Metal should cross gingival margins at right angles To ensure rigidity – inferior border should be made thicker “Ledging” occurs when metal margins are thick or linear and provides unnatural contours “Step back” modification requires the superior border of the plate to cover the cingulum of the individual tooth 47
- 48. *Exceptional rigidity –des not interfere with functional movements *Stabilize periodontally weak teeth *May provide additional indirect retention *If mandibular tori cannot be removed, adequate relief should be provided *Extensive coverage – decalcification of enamel *Irritation of tissues in patients with poor oral hygiene 48
- 49.
- 50. Lingual bar +lingual plate Upper and lower borders are similar to lingual plate No continuous metal sheet Upper bar – half oval cross-section (2-3 mm height and 1mm thickness) Two bars should be connected by rigid minor connectors 50
- 51. Rests should beplaced at each end of the bar – no further posterior than 1st premolar 51
- 52. *Effectively extends indirect retention inan anterior direction *Free flow of saliva – marginal gingiva stimulation Tendency to trap debris Uncomfortable – multiple borders and thickness 52
- 53.
- 54. Runs across mucosaon facial surface Half pear shaped Longer than lingual bar Height and thickness must be greater Successful treatment very limited 54
- 55. SWING LOCK MODIFICATION Labialcomponent does not serve as major connector Hinge at one end and locking device on the other Permits RPD to reach inaccessible undercuts 55
- 56. Considered when remaining major connectorscannot be used *Patient acceptance is poor-uncomfortable *Bulk distorts the lower lip *Labial vestibule not deep enough to accommodate a rigid connector without encroaching on the gingival margins 56
- 57. Indications Tooth supported RPDLingual bar Insufficient room between floor of mouth and gingival margins Lingual plate Anterior teeth with reduced periodontal support Lingual plate Anterior teeth with reduced periodontal support and large interproximal spaces Double lingual bar Replacement of all mandibular posteriors Lingual plate 57
- 58. Design of mandibularmajor connectors I – outline basal seat area on the diagnostic cast II – outline inferior border of major connnector III – outline superior border of Major connector IV – unification 58
- 59.
- 60. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Acrylic dentures Recent advances Conclusion References 60
- 61. Acrylic dentures Most commonlyused Indicated when the life of the denture is expected to be less Or if relining may be necessary Weaker and less rigid than the metal alloys - more likely to flex or fracture during function. 61Connectors -J. C. Davenport, R.M.Basker, J. R. Heath, J. P. Ralph, PO. Glantz, and P. Hammond (BDJ)
- 62. INDICATIONS During the phaseor rapid bone resorption after tooth loss When remaining teeth have poor prognosis, and an extraction and replacement is expected Interim denture In growing individuals 62Connectors -J. C. Davenport, R.M.Basker, J. R. Heath, J. P. Ralph, PO. Glantz, and P. Hammond (BDJ)
- 63. Design for thereplacement of one or two anterior teeth in young people is the 'spoon' denture. It reduces gingival margin coverage to a minimum, but a potential hazard is the risk of inhalation or ingestion. A more stable and therefore more widely applicable design is the modified spoon denture. Here one has the choice of relying on frictional contact between the connector and the palatal surfaces of some of the posterior teeth, or of adding wrought wire clasps. 63Connectors -J. C. Davenport, R.M.Basker, J. R. Heath, J. P. Ralph, PO. Glantz, and P. Hammond (BDJ)
- 64. Another acceptable designis the 'Every' denture which can be used for restoring multiple bounded edentulous areas in the maxillary jaw. Acrylic RPDs in the mandible often lack tooth-support making tissue damage highly probable. Such RPDs should therefore be avoided whenever possible. 64Connectors -J. C. Davenport, R.M.Basker, J. R. Heath, J. P. Ralph, PO. Glantz, and P. Hammond (BDJ)
- 65. Contents Introduction Major connectors Role ofmajor connectors Types of maxillary major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Types of Mandibular major connectors Review of indications Steps in Designing Acrylic dentures Recent advances Conclusion References 65
- 66. Recent advances Recent workhas shown that CAD/CAM/RP technologies can be successfully applied to the fabrication of RPD alloy frameworks 66
- 67.
- 68. RPD framework usingPEEK 68
- 69.
- 70. Bibliography McCracken’s removablepartial prosthodontics – 12th edition Stewarts removable partial prosthodontics – 4th edition Partial dentures – John osborne and George Lammie – 4th edition Connectors -J. C. Davenport, R.M.Basker, J. R. Heath, J. P. Ralph, PO. Glantz, and P. Hammond (BDJ) Use of CAD/CAM technology to fabricate a removable partial denture framework (R. J. Williams, BA, PhD,a Richard Bibb, BSc, PhD,b Dominic Eggbeer, BSc,c and John Collis, BDS) (JPD) 70
- 71.
Editor's Notes
- #9 The marginal gingiva are highly vascular and susceptible to injury under sustained pressure