Ante’s Law is a concept given by Irvin Ante in 1926 which helps in determining the amount of support which has to be taken to replace missing teeth which has been given in terms of peri-cemental area of the abutment teeth. This has been adopted and reinforced by other authors – Johnston, Dykema, Shillingburg, and Tylman.
Definition: “The sum of pericemental area of abutment teeth should be equal to or surpass that of teeth being replaced.”
Definition according to GPT: “In fixed partial denture prosthodontics for the observation that the combined pericemental area of all the abutment teeth supporting a fixed partial denture should be equal to or greater in pericemental area than the tooth or teeth being replaced ;as formulated for removable partial prosthodontics the combined pericemental area of the abutment teeth plus the mucosal area of denture base should be equal to or greater than the pericemental area of the missing teeth “
Ratios according to Ante’s law for replacement of missing teeth:
- The optimum crown root ratio for the tooth which can be utilized as an FPD abutment is 2:3.
- Ideal crown root ratio should be 1:2 which is the Root Surface area should be double that of the crown surface area.
- But the ratio can be 1:1 which is the Root can be equal in area to that of the Crown present.
- Tooth support varies depending on length and shape of root and not just the surface area. Here are some of the cases where the shapes of the roots determine the amount of support provided irrespective of the length or surface area it covers.
- Long irregularly shaped and divergent roots offer great support.
- Roots with greater faciolingual dimension will make it a superior abutment to the roots which are circular in cross section.
- Short, conical and blunted roots offer poor support, for example, a molar with divergent roots will provide better support than molar with conical roots with little or no inter-radicular bone.
- Single rooted with elliptical cross section will offer better support than the tooth with a circular cross section. As circular teeth will not give enough resistance to forces exerted on the tooth and in the case of an Elliptical root the forces are dispersed more efficiently thus giving better support.
From the time the law was stated and defined, it has been used extensively and has become a must follow rule for every Fixed prostodontic case where more than two teeth are to be replaced. If the Ante’s law is not followed the resultant Fixed partial denture will be exerting excess forces on the abutment tooth which will lead to bone loss and eventually mobility of the abutment.
Ante’s law is not evidence-based. Please read the following paper:
Ante’s (1926) law revisited: a systematic review on survival rates and complications of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) on severely reduced periodontal tissue support.
(Lulic M1, Brägger U, Lang NP, Zwahlen M, Salvi GE, 2007)
The authors’ conclusions were:
(i) masticatory function could be established and maintained in subjects receiving FDPs on abutment teeth with severely reduced but healthy periodontal tissue support
(ii) FDPs survival rates compared favourably with those of FDPs incorporated in subjects without severely periodontally compromised dentitions.
Yes Raina, that is true it is not evidence-based and that is the reason we have mentioned it as a “Concept”. Thank you for sharing the reference with us.
It was a very helpful article.Thank you
hello ,, great article ..
but when i have missing canine and first premolar ,, can i make a FPD rom the 2nd premolar to the lateral ?
thank you
Lateral does not have much surface area and the root is small in length and conical which does not give much support to an FPD. So it is not advisable to just take Lateral incissor as support for a bridge from lateral to 2nd Premolar. It will be better if you take support from the central as well.
Hi,
If I have a missing first , second premolar and also first molar missing wat am I supposed to do for tht patient??
You can suggest and Implant, if that is not an option you can take support from Canine and Second Molar depending on the Bone support of both these teeth. As Canine has a long Root it can take the force if the gingival and bone support is good. You can also take the support of Lateral but make sure you mention to the patient about the complications which might arise due to this.
The Second Molar will end up being loose with time due to the excess force on it so make sure you mention it clearly and then proceed.
What if 4 missing tooth 3 abutments? Which is lateral,canine,2ndPM is it possible?
What are the missing teeth ? Anteriors (Incissors) or Posteriors(Molars) ?
What is the definition of precemental area?
I hope you are asking about Pericemental Area – The Area surrounding the Periodontal ligament around the tooth.
Varun why are you still using Antes Law? This has been dismissed by the contemporary Dental community a long time ago. Teeth have periodontal ligaments and TMJ.
The “law” has no evidence base to it..which is the basic and Gold standard to everything we do.
The use of Antes law has resulted in far too many teeth being aggressively cut for no reason whatsoever.
can you suggest the alternatives to Ante’s law which are being followed. Many schools still teach their students how to use Ante’s law which should change.
I am happy to discuss this one on one..(i think you should)…look for me on FB
will do that, thank you
Antes law is a great concept to follow. It’s common sense in most cases. I’ve seen pleanty of failures and big problems when ignored entirely.
Very true, completely ignoring Ante’s Law is not recommended. Following Antes Laws and also including other Laws is best. I have seen many Dentists and Dental Students who think they are following Ante’s Law but aren’t and this leads to problems.
Ante’s law and crown root ratio are different entities or same?
They are different as, Ante’s law involves many factors while Crown to Root ratio is the measurement which helps in determining the prognosis of a FPD and helps in planning the treatment.
Missing 2 laterals and 2 centrals. Is it ok if only the 2 canines serve as abutments? (Canine with long roots)
If the canines are in good periodontal health then yes, you can use the two canines as abutments to replace the centrals and laterals, as these are anterior teeth the amount of forces is comparatively less when compared to molars.
Can you please explain about anti-Ante’s Law?
There have been many studies done over the years to determine that Ante’s law is not perfect and we can in some cases avoid following Ante’s law depending on clinical factors such as health of the abudments, size and other factors. Many studies have propogated Anti-Ante’s law by conducting studies over a period of time showing success in cases where Ante’s law was not followed.
I have certain PDF files showing the Anti Ante’s law studies which I am not able to upload here, you can mail me at juniordentist@gmail.com if you need those files which I can forward through mail.
what if the missing are : 31+41+42 ? or 14+15 ?
What about a lost canine with an endo treatment on the first permolar that lost half of its crown
missing maxillary 2 centrals is it enough to use lateral as abutment?
Scientifically speaking Laterals alone should not be used as abutments to replace missing Centrals as it does not fulfill the Antes law. But if clinically the laterals are having sufficient Root length they can be used as abutments. keeping in mind that no extreme forces are applied on the teeth in the future.