Fixed bridges
Consider span, abutment prognosis, occlusion and cleansability, as well as alternatives such as adhesive bridges or implants.
Understand
A fixed bridge transfers load to its abutments and creates a maintenance obligation. Adhesive, conventional and implant-supported options differ in tissue cost and risk.
Assess
Assess abutment vitality, periodontal support, restorative history, span, occlusion and access for cleaning. Compare a bridge with an implant, removable option or no replacement.
Apply
Consent includes abutment preparation, debonding, caries, endodontic need and failure. A short span is not automatically suitable if the supporting teeth have poor prognosis.
Key distinctions
Bridge survival depends on abutment prognosis, load distribution, span, connector design and maintenance. Resin-retained bridges conserve tissue but can debond; conventional bridges need preparation and may commit healthy abutments to future restorations. An implant avoids preparing adjacent teeth but brings surgery, cost and its own biological risks. Compare these rather than presenting one as universally superior.
Think through a case
A bridge would require preparation of two sound teeth beside a missing lateral incisor. A resin-retained bridge or other option may conserve tissue.
The distinction to remember
Do not assume fixed means conventional full-coverage. Abutment prognosis and maintenance should drive choice.
Test your recall
What makes a bridge a poor choice despite adequate space?
Show answer
Unreliable abutments or inability to clean the design.