Department of Restorative Dentistry and Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Majmaah University, Al-Zulfi, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Department of Prosthodontics, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Karnataka, India.
Niger J Clin Pract. 2024 Sep 1;27(9):1044-1050. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_740_23. Epub 2024 Sep 30.
While we attempt to restore occlusion in completely edentulous patients there is a consensus among clinicians to articulate the cast using average value and avoid performing facebow transfer. Various studies question the application of facebow transfer in the fabrication of removable complete denture fabrication.
This study was therefore aimed to study the effect on condylar guidance with casts mounted by the facebow method, Bonwill's method, and radiographic method.
A cross-sectional study was performed using casts of edentulous patients attending the Department of Prosthodontics. After establishing a tentative jaw relationship using wax occlusal rims in the edentulous participants, the casts were mounted by Bonwill's method and the facebow transfer method to a semi-adjustable articulator. Protrusive records of the subjects were used to program the articulator to obtain the condylar guidance values. Digital lateral cephalographs were made both in centric and protrusive jaw relationships. The mandibular condyles were then traced and overlapped to obtain radiographic values. The condylar guidance values obtained by Bonwill's method, facebow method and radiographic method were compared using Wilcoxon's signed rank test and Mann-Whitney U test. The SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 21.0. Armonk, NY, USA:IBM Corp.), and, at a probability value of 0.05, the significance of every statistical test was predetermined.
Ten edentulous 45-70 year olds participated in the study. The mean discrepancy between radiography and facebow methods was 12.8° for the right side and 12.7° for the left (P < 0.005). The difference between radiography and Bonwill's methods was significant (P < 0.005), with a mean difference of 34.3° for the right side and 34.7° for the left side. The difference between Bonwill's method and the facebow method was significant (P < 0.005), with a mean difference of 21.5° for the right side and 22° for the left side.
The condylar guidance values obtained by clinical methods (Bonwill's and Facebow) were significantly lesser (P < 0.005) compared to the values obtained by radiographic method.
虽然我们试图为完全无牙患者恢复咬合，但临床医生普遍认为应使用平均值来确定牙合架，并避免进行面弓转移。各种研究都对面弓转移在可摘局部义齿制作中的应用提出了质疑。
本研究旨在研究使用面弓法、Bonwill 法和放射学法记录的髁突导斜度。
本研究为横断面研究，使用的是来自修复科的无牙患者的牙模。在无牙患者的蜡咬合记录上确定了初步的颌位关系后，使用 Bonwill 法和面弓转移法将牙模安装到半可调架上。然后，使用患者的前伸记录来对架进行编程，以获得髁导斜度值。在正中颌和前伸颌位分别拍摄数字化侧位头颅侧位片。然后对下颌髁突进行描记并重叠，以获得放射学法的髁导斜度值。使用 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验和 Mann-Whitney U 检验比较 Bonwill 法、面弓法和放射学法获得的髁导斜度值。使用 SPSS Statistics for Windows（版本 21.0，Armonk，NY，USA：IBM Corp.），并且在概率值为 0.05 的情况下，预先确定了每一个统计检验的显著性。
本研究共纳入了 10 名 45-70 岁的无牙患者。右侧和左侧的放射学法和面弓法之间的平均差异分别为 12.8°和 12.7°（P < 0.005）。放射学法和 Bonwill 法之间的差异有统计学意义（P < 0.005），右侧和左侧的平均差异分别为 34.3°和 34.7°。Bonwill 法和面弓法之间的差异有统计学意义（P < 0.005），右侧和左侧的平均差异分别为 21.5°和 22°。
临床方法（Bonwill 法和面弓法）获得的髁导斜度值明显低于（P < 0.005）放射学法获得的值。
