engleski

Selection of appropriate artificial frontal teeth

Introduction: Various methods have been described as aids for artificial toorh selection. However, most of them are not completely satisfactory. The aim of this study: The aim of this study was to determine a possibility of reconstruction of maxillary central incisor's proportions using some proportions of the hard palate, and to cheque the releability of the golden proportion in maxillary central incisor's selection. Patients and Methods: Eighty individuals (26 men and 56 women, Angle class I occlusion and 18-30 years old) participated in the study. Exclusion criteria were: one or more teeth missing (except third molars), frontal teeth dental restorations, prosthetic appliance or tooth wear. Patients undergone orthodontic treatment or patients with asymmetries and abnormalities in tooth size or shape were also excluded from this study, as well as patients with periodontal diseases. All patients were informed about the aim of the study and the methods that will be used. Ethics comitee of the School of Dental Medicine approved this study. Irreversible hydrocolloid impressions of a maxillary jaw were made (Alginoplast fast set, Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) and casts were poured in the hard stone (ISO Type I, Vel-Mix Stone, Kerr Italia S. p. A., Salerno, Italy). Before the impressions were made, hamular notches were marked by an indelible pencil. Measurements were made on the casts using a precise calliper (0.1mm precision) (DKSH Switzerland Ltd. GPM Antropological Instruments, Zurich, Switzerland). All the measurements were made by one person. The width of the left nad the right maxillary central incisor was measured at the level of interdental papilla (cervical width), at the level of contact points (contact point width) and at the level of incisal edge (incisal width). Clinical crown height was measured between incisal edge and the most apical point of marginal gingiva. Hard palate width was measured between the left and the right hamular notch (hamular width) and hard palate lenght was measured between the left fovea palatina and incisive papilla. Statistical analysis was made by SPSS 12 for Windows. Normality of the distribution was checked by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Means and standard deviations were calculated and the significance between means was tested by the Student's t test. Results: The data were normally distributed (p>0, 05). There was no significant differences between men and women (p>0.05) and between dimensions of the of maxillary central incisors on the left and the right side of dental arch (p>0, 05). Maxillary central incisor&#8217; s width and hight are presented in Figure 1. Hard palate width and hight are presented in Figure 2. Width to height proportion of the hard palate (hamular width to fovea palatina-incisive papilla) and width to length proportion of the central incisor (cervical, contact point and incisal width) are shown in Table 1. Significant differences were found between the hard palate proportion and the maxillary first incisor&#8217; s proportions (p<0.01, Table 2). Width to height proportions of the maxillary central incisor and the hard palate were also compared to the golden proportion (Table 3) and significant differences were found (p<0.01). Conclusion: Proportions of the maxillary central incisors can not be reconstructed according to the proportions of the hard palate, not according to the golden proportions. More appropriate proportions is between 87% and 90%.

frontal teeth; selection; prosthodontic therapy; Angle class I

nije evidentirano