The Check/temporary key in PMMA. What am I looking for and what is it for in a highly complex case?

Authors

  • Alejandro Zamora National University of Cuyo, faculty of dentistry https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1813-5686
  • Edgardo Boero López Universidad Nacional de Cuyo, Facultad de Odontología

Keywords:

PMMA, Dental rehabilitation, Check key

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Currently, the planning and execution of a complex rehabilitation can be carried out thanks to CAD/CAM tools and technology. To predict proper functioning and final result, it is very useful to prepare a verification guide that reproduces in detail the characteristics of the final prosthetic structures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: 47-year-old female patient, in good general health, who manifests discomfort due to her current oral condition. A complete upper arch segmented into 3 sections, supported by dental implants was proposed. As a pre-prosthetic procedure, testing guides were milled on PMMA (Polymethyl methacrylate) discs to corroborate the planned functional, aesthetic and comfort requirements.

RESULTS: The patient's aesthetics, function and comfort were monitored at 15, 30 days and 6 months by adapting the USPHS criteria system (U.S. Public Health Service), to evaluate the results achieved with the check/provisional key in PMMA and final restoration.

DISCUSSION: CAD/CAM technology offers the possibility of designing and milling keys in PMMA, obtaining biocompatibility, adequate mechanical and aesthetic properties. This alternative allows predictability in a highly complex rehabilitation; reducing errors that are difficult to solve in definitive prosthetic pieces.

References

Velasco Ortega E MGLJGA, Segura Egea JJ, Matos Garrido N, Moreno Muñoz J. El tratamiento con implantes dentales en los pacientes adultos mayores.. Av. Odontoestomatol. 2015; 31(3): p. 217-229.

Salso Morell R, Acosta Pantoja A, Iglesias Prats M, Reyes Fonseca A, Rojas Zamora Y. Puente complejo de porcelana sobre implantes Mis- Seven. Complex Porcelain Bridge over MIS- Seven implants. CCM. 2013 Ene-Feb; 17(1).

Ferro K. The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms: Ninth Edition. J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117(55): p. e1-e1.

Pérez P, Velasco Ortega E, González Olivares L, García Méndez A, Rodríguez Calzadilla O. Técnicas quirúrgicas complejas en el tratamiento con implantes oseointegrados del maxilar superior. Un seguimiento clínico de 2 años. Av Periodon Implantol. 2007; 19: p. 25-34.

Alayo Silva I. Rehabilitación implantosoportada en un paciente edéntulo con maxilares atróficos. Reporte de caso. Odontol. Sanmarquina. 2017; 20(1): p. 31-34.

Velasco Ortega E, Pato Mourelo J, García Méndez A, Castro L, Cruz Valiño J. El tratamiento con implantes en pacientes edéntulos totales mandibulares mediante rehabilitación fija. Av Periodon Implantol. 2007; 19(3): p. 151-159.

Gutierrez Rieraa J, Floresa A, Zarate Riverab F, Salinas T. Rehabilitación de un paciente edéntulo mediante puentes implantosoportados. Quintessence Técnica. 2011 Oct; 22(8): p. 495-516.

Monteiro D, Coelho Goiato M, Gennari Filho H, Alves Pesqueira A. Passivity in implant-supported prosthesis. J Craniofac Surg. 2010 Nov; 21(6): p. 2026-9.

Kioleoglou I, Pissiotis A, Konstantinos M. Accuracy of fit of implant-supported bars fabricated on definitive casts made by different dental stones. J Clin Exp Dent. 2018 Mar; 10(3): p. e252–e263.

Prpić V, Schauperl Z, Ćatić A, Dulčić N, Čimić S. Comparison of Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed, CAD/CAM, and Conventional Denture Base Materials. J Prosthodont. 2020 Jul; 29(6): p. 524-528.

Al-Dwairi Z, Tahboub K, Baba N, Goodacre C, Özcan M. A Comparison of the Surface Properties of CAD/CAM and Conventional Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). J Prosthodont. 2019 Apr; 28(4): p. 452-457.

Sadid-Zadeh R, Zirkel C, Makwoka S, Li R. Fracture Strength of Interim CAD/CAM and Conventional Partial Fixed Dental Prostheses. J Prosthodont. 2021 Oct; 30(8): p. 720-724.

Newstetic. FICHA TÉCNICA DISCOS DE PMMA PARA CAD/CAM PORTUX®. [Online].; 2021-11-12. Available from: https://www.newstetic.com/documents_products/FT_087_v5_discos_espanol.pdf?_t=1646336467.

Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Bohsali K, Goodacre CJ, Lang BR. Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1999 Jan; 81(1): p. 7-13.

Goodacre C, Kan J, Rungcharassaeng K. Clinical complications of osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1999 May; 81(5): p. 537-52.

Dumbrigue H, Gurun D, Javid N. Prefabricated acrylic resin bars for splinting implant transfer copings. J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Jul; 84(1): p. 108-10.

Jalalian E, Balouch F, Samiei N, Ghane HK, Iranpoor B, Ebrahimian C. A comparative analysis of splinted and non-splint in opentray impression techniques on different angled implants. Biosci. Biotech. Res. Comm. 2017; 10(1): p. 109-113.

Assuncao W, Filho H, Zaniquelli O. Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations. Implant Dent. 2004 Dec; 13(4): p. 358-66.

Peñate L, Basilio J, Roig M, Mercadé M. Comparative study of interim materials for direct fixed dental prostheses and their fabrication with CAD/CAM technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Aug; 114(2): p. 248-253.

Najeeb S, Zafar M, Khurshid Z, Siddiqui F. Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics. J Prosthodont Res. 2016 Jan; 60(1): p. 12-9.

Blanch-Martínez N, Arias-Herrera S, Martínez-González A. Behavior of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) in prostheses on dental implants. A review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2021 May; 13(5): p. e520–e526.

Papathanasiou I, Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, Ferrari M. The use of PEEK in digital prosthodontics: A narrative review. BMC Oral Health. 2020 Aug; 20(1): p. 217.

Shrivastava S, Dable R, Raj N, Mutneja P, Srivastava S, Haque M. Comparison of Mechanical Properties of PEEK and PMMA: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021 Feb; 22(2): p. 179-183.

Astudillo-Rubio D, Delgado-Gaete A, Bellot-Arcís C, Montiel-Company J, Pascual-Moscardó A, Almerich-Silla J. Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018; 13(2): p. e0193162.

Perea-Lowery L, Minja I, Lassila L, Ramakrishnaiah R, Vallittu P. Assessment of CAD-CAM polymers for digitally fabricated complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Jan; 125(1): p. 175-181.

Alp G, Murat S, Yilmaz B. Comparison of Flexural Strength of Different CAD/CAM PMMA-Based Polymers. J Prosthodont. 2019 Feb; 28(2): p. e491-e495.

Downloads

Published

28-12-2023

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 2 (2023)

Section

Caso Clínico

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Alejandro Zamora, Edgardo Boero López

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 3.0 No portada (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

Usted es libre de:

  • Adaptar — remezclar, transformar y construir a partir del material
  • La licenciante no puede revocar estas libertades en tanto usted siga los términos de la licencia

Bajo los siguientes términos:
Atribución — Usted debe dar crédito de manera adecuada, brindar un enlace a la licencia, e indicar si se han realizado cambios. Puede hacerlo en cualquier forma razonable, pero no de forma tal que sugiera que usted o su uso tienen el apoyo de la licenciante.

NoComercial — Usted no puede hacer uso del material con propósitos comerciales.

CompartirIgual — Si remezcla, transforma o crea a partir del material, debe distribuir su contribución bajo la lamisma licencia del original.