Thakur Mridul, Jain Veena, Parkash Hari, Kumar Pravesh
Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Centre for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, 110029 India.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012 Sep;12(3):175-81. doi: 10.1007/s13191-012-0154-5. Epub 2012 Jul 27.
To evaluate and compare the centric relation and horizontal condylar guidance using interocclusal wax and extra oral Gothic arch methods and subjective evaluation of dentures thus fabricated. Centric relation and horizontal condylar guidance was recorded by using interocclusal wax and gothic arch tracing in 28 completely edentulous patients. These records were transferred to the articulator and difference in both values was recorded. After that patients were divided in two groups according to the centric relation and horizontal condylar guidance recording method used to achieve balanced occlusion. Response of the dentures was subjectively evaluated using "Woelfel subjective evaluation criteria". Centric relation recorded by both the methods did coincide in 7.14 % of patients. Centric relation recorded by interocclusal wax was posterior to Gothic centric relation in 21.43 % of patients, and anterior to Gothic centric relation in 71.42 % patients. Gothic arch tracings gave higher mean guidance values on both the sides as compared to protrusive wax record in all the subjects, although the difference was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). Subjective evaluation showed statistical insignificance for all the parameters in both groups. Gothic arch method records the centric relation at a more posterior position than the Static method, but it does not make any difference in clinical performance of the complete denture. Horizontal condylar guidance angle was approximately similar by both the methods.
使用牙间蜡和口外哥特式弓方法评估和比较正中关系和髁突水平引导,并对由此制作的义齿进行主观评价。采用牙间蜡和哥特式弓描记法记录28例全口无牙患者的正中关系和髁突水平引导。将这些记录转移到牙合架上,并记录两者的差异。之后,根据用于实现平衡牙合的正中关系和髁突水平引导记录方法,将患者分为两组。使用“沃尔费尔主观评价标准”对义齿的反应进行主观评价。两种方法记录的正中关系在7.14%的患者中一致。牙间蜡记录的正中关系在21.43%的患者中位于哥特式正中关系之后,在71.42%的患者中位于哥特式正中关系之前。在所有受试者中,哥特式弓描记法在两侧给出的平均引导值均高于前伸蜡记录,尽管差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。主观评价显示两组所有参数均无统计学意义。哥特式弓方法记录的正中关系比静态方法更靠后,但对全口义齿的临床性能没有任何影响。两种方法的髁突水平引导角大致相似。