Abstract
The author has endeavored to apply a Konus Kronen telescope over 25 years and uses it still now. I rather wonder why the Konus Kronen telescope, which was used by many clinicians in the past, is considerably less used at present. Troubles encountered in its early stage of introduction resemble to those commonly encountered in the use of conventional clinical techniques. With the improved manipulations and better understandings, Konus Kronen telescope is considered to be applicable for a long term with good durability. My clinical experience over 10 to 15 years can support this concept. Though many troubles have been encountered in the use of Konus Kronen telescope, the following countermeasures seem to be capable of preventing these troubles adequately: 1) arrangement of varied factors involved in the retentive force, 2) control of the retentive force, 3) reduced number of abutment teeth, 4) avoidance of adverse effects due to relatively higher occlusal force when Konus Kronen telescope is applied, and 5) establishment of good collaboration with dental technicians. Konus Kronen telescope and magnetic attachment have quite different applications and target fields mutually. Recently magnetic attachment has widely used because of its simplicity, however, the concepts of Konus Kronen telescope and magnetic attachment are very different. First, Konus Kronen telescope has better supporting effects. Konus Kronen telescope clearly can hold stable occlusion for a long term basis. Secondary, periodontium around abutment tooth will not be coverd with denture plate. As a result, Konus Kronen telescope offer better periodontal health than magnetic attachment which is usually coverd. Based on these reasons, denture with magnetic attachments has to be considered as a transitional denture. Taking the detailed difference between the two approaches into consideration, the scope of application and the priority of Konus Kronen telescope are discussed in this article.
