Retention durability of one-retainer versus two-retainer posterior RBFDPs after chewing simulation.

The clinical use of one-retainer RBFDPs in the anterior region has shown higher survival rates compared to conventional two-retainer RBFDPs. The motivation for this study was to assess the validity of this observation when extended to the posterior region. The aim was thus to evaluate different preparation and framework designs for replacing premolars, particularly one-retainer versus two-retainer designs, on the retention of monolithic zirconia posterior RBFDPs. Extracted caries-free human premolars and third molars were embedded in auto-curing resin to create models with an edentulous space of premolar width. Abutment teeth were prepared according to these six designs (n = 8 each): one or two upper retainers with narrow rests, one or two upper retainers with wide rests, and one or two-retainers with wide rests. RBFDPs were milled from monolithic zirconia (KATANA Zirconia HT), and were adhesively bonded using Panavia V5 with corresponding primers. After thermodynamic loading, the quasi-static tensile force required for failure was determined. Failure modes were evaluated using a microscope. Survival rates after thermodynamic loading were 75% for one group (one upper-molar retainer with narrow rest), 100% for the other groups. The debonding forces ranged from 310 ± 224 N (group one upper-molar retainer with narrow rest) to 927 ± 292 N (group two upper retainers with narrow rests). Two-retainer designs failed at significantly higher tensile forces than designs with one retainer (p ≤ 0.05). There were no significant differences between upper and lower designs, or rest widths. Although RBFDPs with two retainers withstood higher debonding forces, RBFDPs with one retainer and wide rest still have a high potential for clinical treatment because of the high forces required for their debonding.