Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare three systems for transferring the position of the maxilla to the articulator and the centric mounting of the mandible with the intraoral situation.Material and methods: Three identical model pairs from 20 patients were transferred to the articulator using Reference AB (Gamma) and Arcus (KaVo) facebows and the esthetically oriented HeadLine transfer bow, and mounted in centric condylar position (CCP) with the help of a bite registration record.
Results: The required reduction of the vertical dimension of occlusion was achieved by lowering the upper part of the articulator until interocclusal tooth contact was shown to be significantly lower (P 0.05) with the HeadLine system after model mounting with a bite registration record than with the skull-related systems. In the horizontal plane, the first centric contact point of the systems in relation to the skull was approximately identical to the situation on the patient, while the HeadLine system led to significant changes in the position of the models in both the horizontal and sagittal planes.
Conclusion: The use of a bite registration record in CCP with the HeadLine system leads to a change in the jaw-closing radius, which does not correspond to the patient situation. Keywords: articulator, facebow, arbitrary facebow transfer, centric condylar position (CCP), Arcus facebow, HeadLine system, Reference AB facebow, arbitrary hinge axis, rotation center