Revision of liter to Tura

Fundamental biomechanical in rehabilitation ORAL

GERARDO BECERRA S.*

Summary. The facto r is biological, mechanical and aesthetic constitute the rational basis in the treatment of both the
conventional prosthesis ovr r e natural teeth s. The objective of this article is r evisar several of the facto r
biomechanical is involved in the two types of prostheses. With r aspect to the conventional prostheses we consider aspects such
as the r etencin and stability, the valuation of the teeth stack r is, replacing the previous teeth r is and canines, l to
morfolog to oclusa l and l to r elaci n ent r e l to oclu s ke n traumtic a and s injured s denta r ia s neck . Ent r
e it s a s regard s bio m ecnico s that have r elacin with the prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants can be
mentioned the biomechanics in natural dentition and r estaurada, the combination implant- natural tooth as stack r is of a
prosthesis pa r cial fixed, the configuration of a r co and the position of the implants, the n umber , length and dimet
r or of the implants implants in the unto r ea of Mola r is, the passive adjustment and comparison ent r e r
estauraciones screwed and the cementadas. The knowledge of these facto r is determined best p r onstico and greater
longevity for the r estauraciones.
Key words: biomechanical factors, retention, prostheses, implants.
ABSTRAC T . The biological, mechanical and esthetic factors to r e the rational foundations in the t r eatment for
both the conventional p r osthesis on natural teeth and for p r osthesis on implants. The aim of this article is to r eview
various biomechanical factors involved in both kinds of p r osthesis. In r efe r ence to conventional p r osthesis; r etention
and stabilit and , abutment teeth valuation, previous and canine teeth r eplacement, occlusal morphology and r elationship
between traumatic occlusion and cervical injuries, to r e we r ed. among the biomechanical aspects in r elation will with
p r osthesis supported by oseointegrated implants, the following can be mentioned: biomechanics in natural and r this r ed
dentition, the combination Of implant-natural tooth as abutments for a fixed partial p r osthesis, the configuration of the a r
ch and implants position, implants numbe r , length and diameter of implants, implants in the molars to r ea, passive
adaptation and comparison between sc r r estorations ewed and cemented. The assessment of these factors will determine the
best p r ognosis and longer conservation of r estorations.
Key words: biomechanical factors, retention, prosthesis, implants

Introduction
S e h to podid or sets r qu e s base s racionale s e
n e l tratamient or protsic or can n is classified
r s e n tre s biggest s categories ; factore s
biological , factore s s s factore mechanical and
aesthetic . And what s factore Aunqu mechanical
s s n what OS s responsible s d e preserves r l to
integrida durabilida d and d d e s restored rations , what s biological s and the s aesthetic s
constitutes n another s component s important s e
n e l xit or d and what s procedure s restorers.

E l camp or d e l to biomecnic to n or h to sid

or n ta explo - rad or com or e l biolgic or or e l
d e l to aesthetics , as well qu and much s time s
e l estrict or contro l d e what s factore s
mentioned s anteriorment e n or e s enough e
and n or n

Medi or ora l dond and some s variable s os n

difcile s d e controls r , po r example , l to
source condition n e l apretamient emotional , or
cntric or or eccentric , aware e or No , the s
force s s and l undue to evil to higien and oral ,
pu - dindos and increases r l to incidenci a d e
what s failures .
What s factore s biomechanical s involved s e n l
to next - tesi s pa r cia l fij to l is n related
conventional s c o n l a r ete nc i o n and l to e
st a b ili d d , l to v to or aci or n d e what s
tooth s pilare s e n amount or to l to Proporci n
crown-root , Configurin g radicula r and re to or
their - perfici e radicula r , l to longitudinal d l
espaci or edntulo , l to sustituci n d e tooth s
anteriore s and canines , l to morfolog to dentari
a and L to function , the s consideration or -

Odon t logo . Esp e c i a l is t to e n Odon t or l og to In t egra l d e l Adul t or . Prof e os r Asoci to OJ .

Facu l t a d d e Odon t olog to . Univ e rs i da d d e Antioquia . Medellin , Colombia . Direcci n electronics
: Gerardob@epm.net.c or

Magazine Faculty of Dentistry University of Antioquia - V ol. 17 No. 1 - Second Half 2005

6
7

6
8

Magazine Faculty of Dentistry University of Antioquia - V ol. 17 No. 1 - Second Half 2005

Ne s ovr e l to prtesi s to extension n

(cantilevers) , what s items intrarradiculares
(posts and journals) and the relationship n entr e
l to oclusi n traumtic a and s injured tooth s s
entr e other .
Entr e what s factore s biomechanical s related s
co n s prtesi s supported s po r implant s
oseointegrado s mention may be made of the
following: the masticatory biomechanics in
natural dentition and restored, the combinatio n
implant e and dient and natura l com or pilare s d
e a prtesi s partial l fixed , the s consideracione s
ovr and the prosthesis to extension, the
configuration of the arc edntulo and the position
of the implants, the number, length and diameter
of the implants, the optimal position of the
implants, the implants in the area of molars, the
etiology of edentulism and risk factors for failure
of the implants, the adaptation pasiv to d e l to
restore , l a n se reabsorci to vertica l and the
comparison between the restorations cementaDAS and the screwed.

F AC T PRAY BIOMECHANICAL IN
NEXT- THESIS P Conventional Fixed
ARCIAL
Retention and stability
L to retenci n and l to estabilida d os n oj s
factore s in - separable s and generalment e a or
depend e l otr or and what s OJ S along s
depends n d e l to set c ke n geomtric to d e l
to preparaci tooth n .
While s qu e l to retenci n previen e or evit to e
l s - lodging or d e l to restauraci n a l or r g or l
eg e d e Inse r - tion , l to estabilida d e l to
dislocaci previen n d e l to restauraci n po r
force s oblique s or side .
L to United d bsic retenci a d e n l a
constitutes n oj s surface s opposed ; e n l to
restauraci n d e remedy - mient or tota l est unto
dad to po r s external surface s s and e n l a n d e
cubrimient restauraci or partial l po r s internal
surface s.

2 ,3

There is n cuatr or factore s related s co n l to

hold -- established n and l to stability :

1. Degree of taper of the Tooth preparation
The opposite walls of a tooth to be retentivas
preparation need to be almost parallel or

multiple s s

Ligerament and conical . Desd e e l punt or d e

vist to achieve parallel walls clinical , it is
difficult for two basic reasons, the first is related
to the creation of ac OS v to two e n c u to qu ie
r pun t or l to l ngos it you of l to preparation
due to the Teeth do not have with- figuration
cylindrical or "tubular", and the second reason is
generated by the problems of settlement,
particularly when it comes to multiple pillars .

2, 4

T eniend or e n acct to what s aspect s prior , s

e with - sider to aceptabl and desd e e l punt or
d e vist to clinic or a conicida d entr e what s 6
and S 10 torque to restauracione s , per
individual or est to conicida d n or e s aplicabl
and torque to preparacione s ovr and multiple s
dond pilare s e e l grad or d e Geneva r genci to
haci to oclusa l or incisa l duty is r may r
torque to allowed r e l asentamient or c or d or d
e t od a l a r e s ta ur aci or n (figur to .1) . S e
must take into account that there is an inverse
relationship entr e e l grad or d e conicida d and
l to retention , to may r conicida d main r be
unto l to retention.

Figur to
1
Grad or d e d e n pilare conicida

2. Circumference
Preparation

and

length

of

the

Amount or may r is to l to circunferenci to

dentari to pre - stop to may r be unto l to
retention . S e pued and deci r qu e s s e n molare
preparacione s os n more retentive s qu e e n
premolars .
To may r longitudinal d d e l to preparaci n
may r be unto l to retention . The s crown s
clinic s short s will have n

Main r retenci n ouest or qu e has lesser and s

superfici e d e contact or co n l to restore.

3. Track of insertion and

removal
L to maxim um retenci n e n a restauraci n s e
consigu e cuand or sun or has and a to i saw a d e
inserci n and remove . Cuand or po r any r
motiv or e s m or increases r e l grad or d e
conicida d d e l to preparaci n (paraleliz to -established n d e pilare s multiple , preparaci n d
e pilare s incl i - associated , etc. ) l to limitaci n
l poor or d e route s d e entry to and leave a d e l
to restauraci n s e get unto co n furrow s and
"cajuelas " , mejorand additional or ace l to
retention . What s furrow s proximale s increases
n l to resistenci a to l desplazamient or
vestibulolingua l ( V -L ) and provides n may r
paralelism or entr e l to superfici e vestibula r and
l to lingua l d e molars . E l eg e d e n s e
inserci deb and sees r tant or e n feel or
vestibulolingua l com or e n feel or mesiodista l
(M-D) .
4. T ype of Restoration
The s s d e cubrimient restauracione or tota l
(crown s complete ) presents n e l double e d e
retenci n how - d or s and compares the co n n
s d e cubrimient or partial l (inlay).

V aloracin teeth stack r is

The Force s oclusale s s s e transmits n to what s
tooth s pilare s thorough s d e what s pontians ,
what s conectore s and what s same s retainers .
There is n tre s requirement s esenciale s qu e
should n cum - pli r what s tooth s pillars :
1. What s tissue surrounding s s should n this
r free s d e inflammation . e s m or is r e l
periodont or before s d e performs r any r
tip or d e odontolog to restoration.
2. Must n presents r adecuad or Sopot e or se
or tant or in quality and in quantity.
3.

Should not have any kind of mobility

pathological.

Nyma n and Lan g establishes n qu e e l grad or

d e m o - vilida d dentari to depend e d e l to
altur to or quantities d

Of l consisting o or d and Sopot e and l to

9

amplitude d l or periodontal ligament . Cuand

or exist and movilida d dentari to e n presence
to d e altur to se to norma l (p . E . The ensa n chamient or L or l producid periodonta ligament
or po r traum to occlusal) , e l simpl and
"Adjustin g occlusal " or "ambientaci n
occlusal " Delete unto l to caus a and L to
movilida d shall have the u n carcte r reversible
. Po r otr or side , cuand or l a d e s originad
movilida to po r a altur to se to reduced , l to
ferulaci n be unto indicate torque to qu e n or
empeor e e l pronstic or d and what s tooth s
pilare s and e l patient e n or present and
incomodida d d u - rant e l to masticatory task .
S i l to demand to works l ovr and what s tooth
s pilare s e s may r qu e s u d d e resistance
capabilities , and l pro - nstic or d e this s be
unto seriament and committed . D e est to maner
to s e considered what and what s tooth s co n
movilida d progresiv a and n or reversible , n or
os n bue - not s candidate s com or pilare
individual s , com or pilare s torque to a to
prtesi s partial l fij to unilateral l or com or
Sopot e d e a prtesi s partial l removable .

Cuand or s and pretend and "ferular " tooth s

compr or - Tucked s periodontalment e and co n
mobility , a prtesi s partial l fij to unilateral l n
or prove e u n d e frul effected or to
multidirectional , and to qu and tod to l to prtesi
s tien e e l mism or grad or d e movilida d qu
and what s pilare s individual.

L to assessing n d e what s tooth s pilare s

depend e d e tre s factors:

1. Crown-root ratio
S e pued and defined r com or l to measure a d
e l to coron of s- d e l to crest to alveola r
related to co n l to longitudinal d d e l to ra z
included e n e l hues or alveola R . L to
proporci n idea l e s 1: 2 or 2: 3 and l to a
minimum to aceptabl e e s d e 1:1 ; e n est and
last or cas or e l pronstic or biomecnic or e s
bastant figur e cuestionabl e ( 2) .
As she loses the bone support is increment a d
e form to negativ to l to proporci n crownroot; similarly increase the lever arm on the
dental portion outside the alveolar bone and
appear the forces latera- les, generating more
mobility.

10

Figur to
2
Crown-ra Proporci n
z

Colaboradore Johnsto n and s e n 197 1

determinaro n qu e l to le and d e befor e spells
and qu e e l re to or superfici e radicula r d e
what s tooth s pilare s deb e is r equal l or may r
a l a d e what s tooth s qu e will be n replaced s
po r Pontians.

Trace or d e Shillinbu r g , H t e t to . Essential s or f fixe d

prosthodo n - tics . Chapte r 7 . T reatmen t plannin g fo r th e
replacemen t o f missin g teeth . Third edition. Quintessence
Publishing Co., Inc. 1997. Pg. 90

2. Configuration of the root

3,

1 1

Configurin g radicula L to R est unto relate to co

n e l greater or lesser periodontal support will be
presented may r Sopot and periodonta l e n that s
race s Mor s wide vestibulolingualmente that
mesiodistalmen- te , Mor s dive r gentes , co n
Configurin g irregular r , co n dilaceracione s or
bend s and e n race s r ga s and Coarse . E l
main r Sopot and periodonta l s e present unto e
n that s race s d e cort and sectioned l rounded ,
race s Geneva r people s or nations , s and
smooth conical , short s and thin s and e n race
s straight .
3. Area or root surface
E s l to extension n qu and busy to l to inserci n
l league - ment or periodontal , as well qu e s
race s voluminous s will have n a superfici e
radicula r may r . E l re to or superfici e
radicula r est unto ntimament e ligad to co n l
to quantities d d e Sopot and bone.

1 2

Length of space edntulo

E l xit or d e a prtesi s partial l fij to depend e
d e what s tooth s pilare s and s u capabilities d
torque to supports r ca r ga s additional .

1 3

A prtesi s partial l fij to d e considerabl e

extension n e s sometid to flexi n baj or ca r ga
s oclusale s l or Cua l conduct and to fractur to
or desprendimient or d e l to porcelain , fractur
of l connecto r , descementaci n d e any a d e
what s retenedore s and a to answer to
desfavorabl e d e what s tissue s qu and
surrounds n what s tooth s pillars . T ode s s s
parciale prtesi s fixed s "Flex " ligerament e
cuand or os n subject s to force s ; as well qu
occlusal and to may r d l espaci longitudinal or
edntulo , may r be unto l flexing.

1 1

D e acuerd or co n l or anteriorment and set , or

n sun or dient e e s e cuand reemplazad or
exitosament or it s tooth s pilare s presents n
adecuad or bone and Sopot . E l reemplaz or d e
oj s tooth s represent to e l limit and torque to e l
adecuad or pronstic o and e l reemplaz or d e
tre s teeth , n or sun or represent to alt or riesg or
d and failure of the prosthetic structure but of the
teeth pillars .
Replacement of previous teeth r is and
canines
L to sustituci n d e what s tooth s anteriore s
and canine s sow in OJ S problem s basic , and l

first or est unto re - lacionad or co n l to

aesthetics , particularment e cuand or exist and a
line to d e l to sonris to alt a and e l grad or d e l
rebord reabsorci n e e s marked . E l 2nd or
problem to s e relation to co n e l aspect or
teniend biomechanical , or e n acct to qu e l to
direcci n d e s s e n force sector r r present to u
previous n component and more horizontal .
In the upper incisors, the forces acting on the
internal part of the arc that, from the point of
view structure l e s l to part e mor s weak , co n
l to tendenci to tilts r what s pilare s haci to
vestibula r . Est to healt h E x i g to n te r i or i
n t e i n cl u i r p ila r e s s ec und a r i o s (first
s premolars ) e n e l design or d e l to prosthetics
, l or Cua l implicab to cost or biolgic or
bastant and high .
E n e l arc or inferio r , the s force s acts n sobr
e l to pa r - t e extern to de l arc , considerndos
e l to more fuert and desd e and l punt or d e vist
structural . Est to healt h n or required and pilare
s secondary , ace qu e E l pronstic or
biomecnic or e s much or mor s favorabl e and
l to prtesi s l replaces torque conventional r what
s cuatr or incisive s pued e this r indicated.
(figur to 3) .

1 1

Figur to
3
Biomecnic to e n e l arc or senior r e
inferio r
(direcci n d e s forces
)

E n e l arc or senior r e s preferibl and sees r

what s im - sow s com or alternativ a s i n or n
limitacione exists s s or economic anatomical . L
to otr to setti n protsic to would be to l to
prtesi s partial l removable .
There are three reasons for establishing that the
canines os n what s more difcile tooth s s d e
replaced r po r medi or d e a prtesi s fij to
8

conventional : l to first to reason n e s why e

this s tooth s is n fuer of l eg e qu e v a D e r
stack to pillar ; l to 2nd why e e n a s simple , st
prtesi to tien e com or pilare s what s tooth s
Mor s weak , e n e l matching previous r r e l
incisiv or latera l and e n e l subsequent r e l
prime r premola r and l to third to why e e n e l
canin or maxilla r s ca r ga s acts n sobr e l to
superfici e lingua l co n l to tendenci to d and
tilts r what s pillars toward vestibula r . Although
the behavior biomecnic or e s more favorabl e e
n e l canin or ma n - dibula r debid or qu e s
force s acts n e n feel or lingual , what s pilare s
torque to a to prtesi s fij to convention Provides l continues n siend or it s more weak .
Dental
morphology
function

and

Robert Lee established that "if we can understand

the role of the teeth, is easy to play more naturally,
Since form follows function" .

14

E n what s term s more simple s s e pued e sets r

qu e l to superfici e oclusa l D e u n dient and
subsequent r est unto formad to po r highlight s
positive s (cusp s and loins ) and embossed s
negative s (Pit s and furrows) . T odo s this s
item s e n permis or participates n e n e l court ,
tr i - turaci n and Escap e d e what s food , the
lodge s d e di s -

Minui r s ca r ga s oclusale s durant e l to

masticaci n and provides r protection n a l
carrill or and l to lengu to entr e another s
functions . A or D and what s component s more
important s d e l to morfolog to oclusa l os n
what s spine s , and to qu triangular and
maintains multiple n s contact s co n what s
tooth s antagonists , dirigiend or and or s
distribuyend force s d e a maner to more
physiological .
Desd e e l punt or d e vist to works l s e r
referenci pued and makes a to l unto r e a canin
to maxilla r com or e l re to formad to po r e l
canin o and e l first o and e l 2nd or premola r .
S u provision adecuad to permit and qu e s e
form n tre s line s straight and Geneva r s qu ge n
haci to far l determinand or l or qu e s e Conoco
e com or making or d e graduation , e s deci r
l to disminuci n graduated l d e size or to
measure to what s e e alej of l observed r . The s
tre s line s os n s qu and tap n what s vertex s
cuspdeos , the s s d area and contact or and what
s more r gene s gingivale s (figur to 4) . L to
extrusi n d e any a d e what s dien - te s l re to
canin to maxilla r n or sun or compromet e l to
esttic to without or qu and alter to l to function
, particularment e Durant and what s movement

s d e laterality.

1 4

Figur to
4
To re canin to
maxilla r

There is n oj s determinant s po r s who s the s

cs - requests s bucale s l grup or d e tooth s
mentioned s anteriorment e os n mor e r ga s qu
and the palatal s ; l to first to est unto relate to co
n what s movement s mandibulare s and what s e
e present to u n patr n Mor s vertica l and po r
end e l to electromiogrfic activities d a d e what
s muscle masticatory s s qu and participates n e
n e l motion or jaw r latera l e s main r . L to gund to reason n deterministic to qu e s e avoid
n what s contact s harmful s e n e l lad or d e n
or job or or contralateral .

E l trmin or "desoclusi canine n " e s

inadecuad or torque to described r e l l fisiolgic
power or d e l to motion to qu e provides n what
s canine s (motion to canine) . L to motion to
canin to implied a task to dond fisiolgic e s e
present to a separating ipsilatera l d e 1, 5 to 2, 0
m m and contralatera l d e 2, 0 to 3, 0 mm .
E n e l motion or protrusiv or n cuatr occurs or
even - to s qu and deserves n r mentioned :
1. E l third or incisa l d e what s cuatr or
incisive s mand i - bulares slips on the
Palatine surface of the central maxillary.
2. The maxillary lateral incisors to be shorter
should allow the passage of the canines
mandibulare s, d and otr to maner to what
s prime r or s wear will occur during the
movement.
3. The contact described in the numeral one
must produce immediate separation from
the posterior teeth.
4. L to superfici e labia l d e what s incisive s
mandibu - lares in all its extension must not
contact co n l to superfici e palatin to d
and what s centrale s superior.
What s patient s n or treaty s or co n morphology
s of n - tation s preserved s (n or altered ) and co
n oclusione s not traumatic show the following
1 4

caracter s - :
low policies s restauracione s
and mu and conservative , good to task
masticatori to and deglutoria , minimum or dental
wear, minimal trauma in the articulation
temporomandibula r and e n e l periodontium ,
Activities d muscula r comfortable , liberta d e n
what s movement s eccentric s and esttic to po r
l to conservaci n d e l to morphology .
Considerations ovr r e the prosthesis to
Extension
(cantilevers)
E n a prtesi s partial l fij to d e l conventional
tre s units , the s force s qu e os n applied s ovr e
e l pntic or os n distributed s equitativament e
to what s tooth s pillars . Cuand or u n pntic or
extension n re - site to u n espaci or edntulo ,

the s force s applied s ovr e e l pntic or has n

effected or totally and different e ovr and what s
tooth s pillars . E n est and last or cas or e l

Pontic will act as a lever arm tilts n - d or e l to

prtesi ligerament s and e l dient stack and r .
Himme L R . (1992) , e n s u n d e literatur
revision to s or - br and prtesi s partial l fij to
extension , spells and qu e e l pronstic or be
unto reform o s i s e has n e n acct to what s next
s criteria :
1.

Teeth pillars with roots r gas and

supporting bone acceptable.

2. Tooth s pilare s co n preparacione s r ga s

and parallel walls.
3.

Teeth vital pillars. The explanation to

consider vital pillars is based in that the
teeth do not vital or with treatment indodntico, presented a decrease of the os l
idez e s t ru ct ur to l t oda the a i dad den
t ar ia , no sensitivity and therefore the instauracin of tooth decay is more feasible
AND , FINALLY , s e considered qu e exist
and mor s toleranci to face to the occlusal
forces to be decreased self-protection.

4. Increase the number of pillars and decrease

the number of Pontians to extension. The

min- mo of pillars for a prosthesis to
extension is two. The only exception is
documented in the literature is the side
maxilla (Antono f f,
1973).
5. Balanced occlusion and harmonious.
6. Full crowns as retainers.
7. Strong connectors (thick).
8. Excellent oral hygiene.

15-18

L to prtesi s to extension n pued and constituted

a r l - ternativa , s i s implant s is n
contraindicated s po r Reason s s anatomical , s
medical , economic s , psychological s or simply
and why e e l patient e n or ok to a prtesi s
removable .
R gense Budtz-Jo colaboradore n and s (1987) ,
stable - support n what and what s patient s co n
prtesi s to extension n inferio r and prtesi s
tota l senior r experience n mejoramient or e n l
to masticaci n and l to estabilida d

D e l to r cuand prtesi s senior or s e compar to

co n what s portadore s d e prtesi s partial l
removibl e inferio r .
Elements intrarradicula r is
(posts
and
journals)
"Posiblement e n or exist and otr to circunstanci
to e n l to practic to odontolgic to e n l to qu e s
e there is to abusad or more , co n s clear
example s d e sobretratam iento ; to l pensa r
qu and tod to part dentari to desvitalizada ,
required to couple a s u restoration , l to
deploymen t d e s post and journals"

1 9

L to majority a d e s investigacione s ovr and

post s and journals have been carried out in vitro
, evaluates n - d or s s s required tensile force s
torque to remove r what s different s type s d epost . Unfortunately , the s force s tensiles , cas i
nunc a s e located n e n clnic a and s force s
laterale s qu e os n s qu and oc u - rre n e n
cavida d ora l os n mu and difcile s d e
evaluation test r e n s i n vitro .
E l juici or clinical , base or e n e l Sopot and d
e l to li - teratur a and L to evidenci to emp ric
to rolls over to po r What s more experienced
clinical s , deterministic to qu e cuand or e l 70
% or mor e d e l to estructur to coronari to est
unto hold a n o e s m a l a n d utilisation e u n
post e and trunnion.

2 0

L to preparaci n l conduct or implied a l a

minimum to removal of dentin. The
sobrepreparacin leads to l debilitamient or to l
to potential d d e perforaci n d e s parede s root
.
E n amount or to l to estructur to ring l s e pued
and stable - ec r qu e to r conservaci may n d e
est to , main r be unto l to concentraci n d e
source condition n e n l a n cervica porci l l
tooth . S i good to quantities d d e estructur choir
- na l est to preserved , may r be unto l to
resistenci a to l to fractur to durant e l to task .

1 masticatory

Biomecnicamente , e l design or exitos or

torque to u n post e and muo n deb e r s next

meeting s carac - features :
1. Suitable apical seal (quality of the endodoncia) to prevent the percolation of fluids
through the apical foramen.

2. Root Canal Preparation minimum (menima removal of dentin).

3. Adequate length of the pole.
4. Coronary structure resistant biomechanicsmind (quantity and solidity).
5. Effect of stent (surround the trunnion).
6. Extend s i o n d e l ma r g e n d e l a r e s
ta u raci or n h a s t to tooth structure
heals.
There is n vario s factore s related s co n l to re
- tenci n d e what s post s entr e what s who s s
e can n mentions r what s :

2 2

To . geometry to d e l to preparaci n l cana l

radicula r . L to retenci n increased to to
measure to what s e e paraleliza n s parede s l
cana l (main s tapered s or main s tapered) .
Goodacr and report or qu and desd e e l punt or d
e vist to retention , what s post threaded s s
active s d e parede s parallel s (contact or direct
or co n l to dentin ) so n what s more retentive .
S E H to establecid or e n vario s study s qu e
this s post s induces n microfracture , as well qu
e s u Utilisation n n or deb e r routine . Os n
followed s e n retenci n po r what s post

threaded s s or sawing s passive s (cap a d e

cement or entr e e l post e and the canal walls) of
parallel walls, after po r what s smooth s d e
parede s parallel s and po r last or it s post s cone
s or Tapered s cast.

23-2 5

B . Longitudinal d l pole . Alrededo r d e est e

tpic or has and much to literature . S e has n
sugerid or some s recommendations s or mor s
bie n theories . V ary s auto - re s recommends n
qu and deb e r 2/ 3 d e l to longitudinal d ;
another s says root n qu and deb and reaches up
to a l a r m i - ta d d e l to ra z included dentr or
l hues or ; another s alveolar qu and deb e is r
equal l to l to coron anatomical to . L to majority
d and what s autore s sets n qu e l to
longitudinal d l post and deb e r 3/ 4 d e l to
longitudinal d radicula r and qu e s e n prevents a
what must s cuatr or or zinc or millimeter s e n
race apical . s r ga s est to proporci n e s acep
- table ; n or was happening and l or mism or co
n race s short s dond e n or sun or e l pronstic
or biomecnic or est unto seriament and
committed , WITHOUT or qu e achieved r l to
proporci n d e what s 3/ 4 eliminar to what s
cuatr or or zinc or millimeter s apicale s
comprometiend or e l sell and e n est to re to ta
n important . If n emba r g or cad to dient and
deb e r ev to-

Or individualment luad and torque to determines

24 , 2 5
r l to longitudinal d definitiv of l post.
C. diameter. The increase in the diameter with
the intention of increasing the retention produces
only of- bilitamiento walls and increases the
possibility of a "bang" radicula r . The diameter of
the post office did not deb and exceeds r 1/ 3 l
dimetr or d e l to ra z e n any r point of its
length and in its apical portion (post) must not be
greater than one millimeter. It is considered that
the average diameter is between 0.6 and 1.2mm.
And it is necessary to relate it with the diameter of
the revolving different instruments used in the
preparation of the duct to the pole .

23

D . T extur to shallow . exist and rela n direct to

entr e l to textur to surface l and l to retention .
What s study s shows n qu and the threaded
surface s s , co n irre - gularidade s or arenada s
os n much or mor s retentive s qu e s smooth .
E . Medium s d e cementation . What s media s
ceme n - tante s improvement n l to retenci n
and creates n u n sell e a l or r g or l channel .
What s media s d e n s comnment cementaci
mor e used s os n fosfat or d e zinc , ion - mer
2 6
or d e vidri or and cement s d e resin.
L to use n clnic a d e what s post s s or
prefabricated cast s depend e d e l to assessing n
entr e s s advantage and disadvantage s d e cad
to a or d and what s systems . N or pued e
considerars e u n sun or sistem to com or uni versa l or idea l and n or exist e u n system
1 9
torque to all s s situacione s clinics.
E l element or intrarradicula r deb and meeting r
s next n - te s features :

Allow the passive insertion and do not

produce ten- sions internal.

Use as far as possible cementos

adhesives.
Use materials not corrobles and resistant.

The material of the post must be

biocompatible.

Qu e is n s system supported s po r study s s

and d clinical and laboratory .

that are compatible with other elements protsicos.

 That has cost rational.

that has the appropriate length.
E l aflojamient or l post e and l to fractur a d e
est e or d e l to ra z os n what s oj s failure s
mor e comune s co n what s item s
intrarradiculares .
Entr e d e s cause s torque to e l fracas or s e
can n enu - mere r s following :
1. Improper Pattern of the post (deficient impressure of the root canal).
2. Thin posts and therefore weak.
3. Post with circular configuration (poor retaining).
4. Wedge effect by poles very tapered.
5. Do not splint to coronal tissue remnant.
6. Excessive diameter.
7. Contamination of the root canal during the
insertion of the post.

8. Defective casting technique (pores, irregularidades, pearls, etc.).

9. Low coronal tissue remnant.
10 . Use of alloys with high potential of
corrosion.
1 1. short poles.
Traumatic occlusion and dental lesions
V ary s study s supports n l to theory a d e t o l a
with - concentration of tension in the cervical
area of the die n - tes is responsible not only for
the development of lesions cervicale s n or
carious s without or also n d e l s e n fails to
27

retention of the restorations .

The occlusal
trauma, the lodge s d e produced r injured tooth s
s s n or cariosas cervicale , pued and cause r
detachment , Filtr to - cione s and failure s e n l
to restorations .
E n l to literatur to s injured tooth s s n or carious
s s e n e n cuatr classified or categories :

A. Attrition . e s l to prdid to d e l to
estructur tooth to by contact (tooth-tooth),
as for example, role of chewing or bruxism.
28

s led cervicale s Produced s po r voltage.

B. Abrasion. Loss of the dental structure po r

mechanical medium s s repetitive s com or
e l brushing.

dentitions without fu n -- established n , the s

force canine s laterale s os n transmitted s to
what s tooth s later , l or qu e pued e r to injuring

28, 29

C. erosion. Dissolution of the chemistry of the

dental structure, usually caused by diet or
3 0

acids (external or internal) .

The erosive
lesions are characterized by the loss of the
tooth structure of a wide surface that
generally involves several teeth.
D. Injured s cervicale s induced s po r traum
to occlusal . e s l to prdid to d e l to
estructur to dentari to producid to po r
flexi n l dient e originad to po r traum to
or source condition n occlusal . This s
injured s has n wedge-shaped with sharp
edges with a intracrevicular localization of
all or part of the injury. Grippo in 1991 the
called idiopathic or Abfracciones injury.

31

The s force s n or axial s or laterale s creates n

source condition n and compresi n e n e l re to
cervica l presentndos e a n d e disrupci s
unione s chemistry s d e what s cristale s d e l
esmalt hidroxiapatit to e and makes n qu e this s
are more susceptible to chemical attack and
subsequent deterioration or mechanical .
The dental structure, particularly the enamel, Tien
and may r resistenci a to l to compresi n qu e a
l to te n - Zion and therefore suffer more damage
when it is subjected to forces tensiles. On the
other hand, the dentin is more resistant to the
voltage due to its high conte- n i c o r g n ic or
c or when it c o m p a ra c on e l e s malt e

28 , 3

and the greater resilience of the dentin allows

greater deformaci n if n fracture . e l s e e esmalt
comport to as a rigid unit, while the dentin
deforms elastically beneath the enamel.
What s canine s has n u n pape l significativ or
e n l a n d e will protection s tooth s posteriore s
Durant and what s laterality movements. In

2 8

L to clav and diagnostic to torque to the s

injured s cervicale s induced s po r traum to
oclusa l e s desd and lueg or l to presence a d e s
oclusale force s laterale s durant e l to m ast i ca
c ke n o l o s m ov i my e n t s parafunc i ona l
is . E l tratamient or d e s injured s induced s po
r traum to oclusa l depend and crticament e d e l
to oclusi n and s modalidade s traditional s d e
tratamient or qu e n o consider n l to actio n d e
s s tensile force s e n l to etiolog a d e this s
injured s is n aimed s To l failure . What s
materiale s d e baj or modul e elstic or (more
flexible ) and alt to resistenci to tensil , com or
the s s s d composite resin and microrrelleno , so
n good s candidate s torque to restores r est and
tip or d e injuries , and to qu e presents n elastic
Propertie s s torque to resisted United r l to
flexi n l re to cervical . L to eliminaci n d e s
s n force or axial s or laterale s pued e r bring to
cab or po r u n simpl e Adjustin g oclusa l or
ambientaci n oclusa l l or qu and took a l a n or
eliminaci reducci n d e l to source condition n
sobr e l to restauraci n aumentand or l to
2 7
longevida d d e l to same.

Correspondence
Gerard or Becerr to S .
Empowers d d e
Odontolog to Universida
d d e Antioqui to
Medellin , Colombi to
Direcci n electronics : Gerardob@epm.net.c or

Bibliographic references
1. Becerra G. aesthetic foundations in oral rehabilitation.
Part I: Factors that influence the dental aesthetics. Progives s "Golden" . Esttic to facial . Re v In t Prtesi s
Estomatol, 2001; 3(4): 247-252
2. Shillinbu r g H, Hobo S, Whitsett L, Jacobi R, Bracket
S.
Principles of tooth preparations. In: Fundamentals of
fixed prosthodontics. 3 ed. Chicago: Quintessence
Publishing,
1997. p. 1 19137
3.

Pameije r Ja n HN . T oot h preparatio n In :

Periodonta l an d or c - clusa l factor s i n crow n an d
bridg e procedures . Denta l productive r fo r
Postgraduat e Courses . Amsterdam : Holland ; 1985 .

4. Kaufman EG, Coelho DH, Colin L. factors influencing

the retention of cemented gold castings. J Prosthet
Dent, 1961;
1 1: 487502.
5. Jo r gense n KD . Th e relationshi p betwee n retentio
n an d Geneva r genc e or f cemente d venee r crowns
. Act to Odonto l Scand, 1955; 13: 35-40.
6. Lore and re , Myer s GE . Th e retentiv e qualitie s or
f bridg and retainers. J Am Dent Assoc, 1968; 76: 568572.
7. Potts RG, Shillinbu r G H T , Duncanson MG. Retention
and resistance of preparations for cast restoration. J
Prosthet Dent, 1980; 43: 303-307.
8. Shillinbu r g H, Hobo S, Whitsett L, Jacobi R, Bracket
S.
T reatment planning for the replacement of missing
teeth. In: Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3 ed.
Chicago: Quintessence Publishing, 1997; p. 85-103.
9. Niklau Nyma n s , S L . T oot h mobilit and an d th e
bioassays l rati or - nal and fo r splintin g teeth .
Periodontol , 200 0 - 1994 ; 4:15-22 .

10. Penn and re , Kraa l JH . Crown-to-roo t ratio : It s

significanc e i n restorative dentistr and . J Prosthet Dent,
1979; 42(1):34-38
1 1. Rosenstie l s , Lan d M , Fujimot or J . Contemporar
and fixe d prosthodontics. 3 ed. St. Louis: Mosb and ,
2001.
12. Jepsen, A. Root surface measurement and a method for
x-ra and determinatio n or f roo t surfac e area . Act
to Odonto l Scand,1963; 21:35-46.

Dent Assoc, 1998; 129: 96-97.

21. Henr and PJ . Photoelasti c Analysi s or f pos t an d
cor and restorations .
Aust Dent J. 1977; 22: 157-161.
22. Lawrence WS. Factors to f fecting retention of post
systems:
To literature revie w . J Proth Dent, 1999; 81(4): 380-385

13. Johnston J F , Phillips R W , Dykema R W . Modern

practice in c row n a n d br i dg e pros t hodon ICT s
. 3 e d . Ph ila d ph ia: Saunders, 1971.

23. Goodacr and CJ , Spolnic k KJ . Th e prosthodontic s

managemen t of endodontically treated teeth: to literature
revie w . Part I. Succe s an d failur e data . T reatmen t
concepts . J Prosthodont ,
1994; 3:243-250.

14. Rufenacht CR. esthetics and its relationship to function

in : Essential s or f Esthetics . Chicago : Quintessenc
and Publishing, 1990. p.137-209

24. Standlee J P , Caputo AA, Hanson EC. Retention of

endo- dontic dowels: e f fects of cement, dowel length,
diameter and design. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 39: 400-405.

15. Himmel R. The cantilever fixed partial denture: to

literature revie w . J Prosthet Dent, 1992; 67(4): 484-487

25. Kurer HG, Combe , Grant AA. Factors influencing the

retention of dowel. J Prosthet Dent 1977; 38(5): 515-525

16. Ewin g JE . Re-evaluatio n o f th e cantileve r

principle . J Prosthet Dent 1957; 7:78-92.

26. Ruemping Dr Lund, Mr, Schnell RJ. Retention of

dowels subjected to tensile and torsional forces. J
Prosthet Dent
1979; 41(2):159-162.

17 W right WE. Success with the cantilever fixed partial

den- ture. J Prosthet Dent, 1985; 55: 537-539.
18. Goldfogel MH, Lambert RL. Cantilever fixed prosthesis
replacin g th e maxillar and latera l scorer : desig n
onsideration . J Prosthet Dent, 1985; 54: 477-478.
19. Becerr to G , V alenci to G . relate s endodonticprosthetic , poles and trunnions . Rev Fac Odont Univ
Ant, 1998; 10(1):
29-35
20. Christensen Gordon. Post and Core: State of the art. J
Am

27. Becerr to SG . It s ione s cervicale dental s s induced s

po r ocl u - si n traumatic . Re v fa c Odon t Uni v w
t 1998 ; 9(2):53-5 6
28. Read TOILET, Eakle WS. Possible role of tensile stress
in the etiology of erosive cervical lesion of teeth. J
Prosthet Dent
1984; 52(3):374-380
29. Braem M, Lambrechts P , V anherle G. stress-induced
EC r - vical injuries. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67(5):718-722

30. McClure FJ, Ruzicka SJ. The destructive e f fect of citrate vs. lactate ions on rats molars tooth surfaces in vivo . J Dent
Res 1946; 25:1-12.
31. Grippo JO. Abfractions: a new classification of hard tissue injuries of teeth. J Esthet Dent 1991; 3(1):14-19
32. Bowen R, Rodriguez, M. T ensile strength and modulus of elasticit and or f toot h structur e w d l restorativ severe and
materials . J Am Dent Assoc 1962; 64:378-387
33. Renouar d F , Ranger t B . Generates l Ris k Factors . In : Ris k factor s i n im pl a n t den ti s t r and . S i mp l ifie d c
l i or c a l w to lysi s fo r pre dictabl and treatment . Chicago : Quintessenc e Books ; 1999 . p.13- 2 8
34. Crai g RG . Restorativ e denta l materials . 6 ed . S t Louis : Mosby;1980
35. Becerra G, Botero H. Considerations in basic prosthetic implants oseintegrados. Rev Fac Odont Univ Ant
1997; 8(2):62-69
36. W orthington P , Branemark PI. Advanced osseintegration its r ger and . Application in the maxillofacial region. Chicago:
Quintessence Book; 1992.
37. Haraldson T , Carlsson GE. Bite force and oral function in pattients with oral osseointegrated implants. Scand J Dent Res
1977; 85: 200-208.
38. Hob o s , Ichid to E , Garc to L . T reatmen t plannin g In : O s seeointegratio n an d or cclusa l Rehabilitation .
And ok or Quintessence Publishing Companies and . 1991.p 55-86
39. Lundgren D, Laurell L, biomechanical aspects of fixed bridged w ork s upported by natural teeth and endo ss eous
implants. Periodontol 2000 1994; 4: 23-40.
40. V An Rossen I P , Braak LH, Putter C, Groot K. Stress- absorbin g element s i n denta l implants . J Prosthe t Den t 1990 ;
64(2):198-205.
41. Skala k R . Biomechanica l onsideration s i n osseointegrate d prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 843-848
42. Ericsso n I , Lekhol M U , Branemar k PI , Lindh and J , Glant z PO , Nyma n S . To clinica l evaluatio n or n fixedbridg and restoration s supported by the combination of teeth and osseointegrated titanium implants. J Clin Periodon 1986;
13(4): 307-312.
43. Astrand P , Bo r g K, Gunne J, Olsson M. Combination of natura l teet h w d osseointegrate d implant s to s prosthesi s
abutments : at 2-yea r longitudinal l stud and . In T J Ora l Maxillofa c Implants 1991; 6(3): 305-312.
44. Cohe n s , Ornstei n J . Th e us e or f attachment s i n combinatio n implant and natural-tooth fixed partial dentures: A
clinical report: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994; 9: 230-234.
45. Rieder EC. Torquethe. To survey of natural tooth abutment intru- sion with implant-join fixed partial dentures. Int J Rest
Dent 1993;13:334-347.
46. Sheet s CG , Earthma n JC . natura l toot h intrusio n an d reverse l i n implant-assiste d prosthesis : evidenc e or f w d
to hypothesi s fo r occurrence . J Prothe t Den t 1993 ; 70:513-520 .

47. Cho GC, Chee W W . Apparent intrusion of natural teeth under an implant-supported prosthesis: a clinical report. J Prosthet
Dent 1992; 68:3-5.
48. Sheet s CG , Earthma n JC . T oot h intrusio n i n implant-assiste d prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 77(1):39-45.
49. Ranger t B , Krog h PHJ , Lange R B , go n Roeke l N . Blessings n overlo d an d implant s fracture . To restrospectiv
and Clinica l analysis . In T J Ora l Maxillofa c Implant s 1995 ; 10:326-334 .
50. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous
ja w . Int J Oral its r g 1981; 10:387-416
51. Ranger t B , JEM T T , Jorneu s L . Force s an d moment s or n
Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;
4:241-247.
52. White SN, Caputo AA, Anderkvist t . e f fect of cantilever length on stress transfer by implant-supported prostheses. J
Prosthet Dent 1994; 71:493-499.
53. Misch EC. Principles of cement-fixed prosthodontics and implant dentistry in: Contemporary implant dentistr and . St Louis:
Mosby-year Book; 1993. p.651-668
54. Renouard F , Rangert B. biomechanical risk factors. In: Ris k factor s i n establish t dentistr and . Simplifie d clinica l
Analysi s for predictable treatment. Chicago: Quintessence Books;
1999. p.13-28
55. I P , Ericsos Palacc n I , Engstran D P , Ranger t B . practiced l guideline s basis d o n biomechanica l principles : In :
Optima l establish t positionin g & sof t tissu e managemen t fo r th e Bran e- mark . Chicago : Quintessenc and
Publishing ; 1995 . P . 21-3 3
56. Rangert BR, Sullivan RM, Jemt TM. Load Control factor for implants in the posterior partially edentulous segment. Int J
Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 3:360-370.
57. I TJ , Hernande Balsh z RE , Pryszla k MC , Ranger t B. To comparativ e stud and or f on and establish t versu s tw
or replacin g to singl e mola r . In T J Ora l Maxillofa c Implants . 1996 ;
1 1(3):372-378.
58. Rosenstie l S F , Lan d M , Fujimot or J . Implant-supporte d fixe d prostheses. In: Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 3
ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2001. p. 313-353.
59. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. cement-retained versus screw-retai- ned implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and
esthetics in implant dentistr and . J Prosth Dent, 1997; 77(1):
28-35
60. Keith is, Miller B H, W oody RD, Higginbottom FL. Ma r - ginal discrepancy of screw-retained and cemented metalcerami c crown s or n establish t abutments . In T J ora l Maxillofa c Implants, 1999; 14(3):369-378
61. Agar JR, Cameron SM, James C. Cement removal restora- tion s lute d t or m titaniu abutment s wit h simulate d
subgingiva l ma r gins. J Prosthet Dent, 1997; 78(1): 43-47