The Journal
The prosthesis was checked in maximum
intercuspation and in lateral excursions. Proper
instructions for usage and maintainenance of
the prosthesis were given. Patient was recalled
for follow-up appointment after 24 hours and
then after one week post insertion.
Image 15
Image 13
Discussion
Image 14
30
29
3
23
22
10
1
36
This case study explains the rationale of good
treatment planning before opting for particular
treatment mode, whether removable or fixed
partial prosthesis. One should evaluate the
basic diagnostic methods while planning proper
treatment plan. A combination of treatment
options well suiting to the oral presentation and
systemic health of the patient should be
finalized for the individual case. It would save
valuable time, money and also inconvenience
to patient caused by prosthesis failure.In this
case study, the fixed partial denture given
earlier was a biomechanical failure as Ante’s
law was violated. One of the rules of dentistry
that has most successfully passed the
judgment of time is that of Dr. Ante law which
states that the periodontal membrane area of
the abutment teeth for a fixed partial denture
must be equal to or exceed the periodontal
membrane area of the teeth being replaced.
Although intraoral force patterns , caries and
periodontal status of abutment teeth may
modify this rule to some degree, exceeding the
Vol. 13
12 No. 1
2
3
May-August
Sept-Dec 2017
Jan-April
2016
2016