Kinematic comparison of different incisal tables used for anterior guidance reconstruction
- First Online:
- 208 Downloads
Conventional articulators allow the user to adjust the inclination of the incisal table according to reconstruction principles. This fact suggests the adoption of an incisal table which exploits an appropriate curvature related to the individual incisal concavity by the reciprocal motion of the incisors. The aim of this study was to compare different incisal tables by a kinematic analysis of the protrusion motion.
Materials and methods
A parametric planar multibody model of the articulator (reference SL Gamma Dental) was developed by means of the implementation of the contact equations in the sagittal plane both for the condylar and incisal pin/tables guides. Through the use of the parametric model, the equations of contact and motion were mathematically shown for the different devices used in the present study.
Sequenzial incisal tables, individual anterior guidance unit and adjustable curvature were used for the comparison. All the tests were made using three shapes of condylar guidance (CI) with different sagittal condylar inclination (SCI). The numerical parameters of tables were processed and compared to the trajectory of the upper shape of the standard incisal by a mean deviation factor (MDF).
The value of the MDF decreased from a mean value of 0.13 when a flat table was used to a mean value of 0.08 when an adjustable curvature device was used. In all cases the curvature was higher in the first part of the protrusion and progressively decreased during the protrusion path. The variation of the eminence angle may affect the inclination of the ideal incisal table but the curvature is imperceptibly affected by this parameter.
The comparison between three incisal tables showed a better matching of the adjustable curvature of anterior guidance showing full agreement with the results.
KeywordsAnterior guidance Dental articulators Comparative study Movement Occlusion Simulation
- 2.Slavicek R. Prinzipien der Okklusion. Inf Orthod Kieferorthop. 1982;3(4):171–212.Google Scholar
- 3.Slavicek R. The masticatory organ: function and dysfunction. 1st ed. Austria: Gamma Medizinisch – Wissenschaftliche Fortbildungs –AG; 2002.Google Scholar
- 4.Slavicek R. Die funktionellen Determinaten des Kauorgans. Muenchen: Zahnaerztlich-Medizinisches Schrifttum; 1984.Google Scholar
- 5.Starcke EN. The history of articulators: pursuing the evolution of the incisal-pin and guide, Part II. J Prosthodont. 2001;10(2):113–21.Google Scholar
- 10.McHorris WH. The importance of anterior teeth. J.Gnathol. 1982;1:19–36.Google Scholar
- 16.Starcke EN. The history of articulators: “scribing” articulators: those with functionally generated custom guide controls, part I. J Prosthodont. 2004;13(2):118–28.Google Scholar
- 17.Starcke EN. The history of articulators: “scribing” articulators: those with functionally generated custom guide controls, part II. J Prosthodont. 2005;14(1):57–70.Google Scholar
- 24.Gerald F. Curves and surfaces for CAGD, a practical guide. 5th ed. Morgan-Kaufmann; 2002.Google Scholar
- 25.Edwad JH. Computer-aided kinematics and dynamics of mechanical systems. Allyn and Bacon; 1989.Google Scholar