{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015139442231075698, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002390438247011952, 'mean_word_length': 5.474226804123711, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of artificial tooth material on mandibular residual ridge resorption.

PURPOSE
In this 10-year longitudinal study we evaluated the amount of mandibular residual ridge resorption for 2 groups of subjects with complete dentures, one group with porcelain artificial teeth and the other with acrylic resin teeth.


METHODS
One hundred and nine patients who had undergone ridge extension procedures with skin graft and prosthetic rehabilitation with porcelain or acrylic resin teeth were investigated for mandibular bone loss. Measurements were made on serial cephalograms.


RESULTS
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of their baseline characteristics (age, period of edentulousness, period of observation, vertical facial morphology, sex, severity of atrophy or presence of bruxism). Similarly, there were no statistically significant differences in amount of bone loss in relation to baseline characteristics.


CONCLUSION
The view that acrylic resin teeth should be preferred to prevent bone resorption of the mandibular residual ridge is not supported by these data. Further research concerning soft denture-lining material should be undertaken to elucidate the potential role of denture pressure in ridge resorption.