Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Comparison of two arbitrary cast transfer systems with a kinematic facebow for mounting a maxillary cast on a semiadjustable articulator


      Statement of problem

      The Kois Dento-Facial Analyzer (KDFA) is used by clinicians to mount maxillary casts and to evaluate and treat patients. Limited information is available for understanding whether the KDFA should be considered as an alternative to an arbitrary facebow.


      The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate and compare maxillary casts mounted by using the KDFA with casts mounted by using the Panadent Pana-Mount Facebow (PMF) and a kinematic axis (KA) facebow.

      Material and methods

      Fifteen participants were enrolled in the study. Three maxillary impressions were made of each study participant. One cast from each study participant was mounted on an articulator by means of the KDFA, PMF, and KA. A standardized photograph of each mounting was made, and the condylar center-incisor distance and the occlusal and incisal plane angles were measured. A randomized complete block design analysis of variance (RCBD) (α=.05) and post hoc tests (Tukey-Kramer HSD) were used to evaluate the occlusal and incisal plane angles and the condylar center-incisor distance.


      Compared with the occlusal plane angle (OPA), the KDFA mounted the maxillary cast at an angle that was statistically lower than those of PMF and KA (P<.001). The KDFA and the PMF condylar center-incisor distances were both significantly greater than that of KA (P=.01). No differences were found between the incisal plane angle (IPA) on maxillary casts mounted with the KDFA, KA, or PMF (P=.16).


      The KDFA and PMF mounted the maxillary casts in a position that was farther from the axis when compared with the KA mounted casts. The KDFA resulted in a lower articulator OPA compared with both PMF and KA. No difference was found between the IPAs of the KDFA, PMF, and KA.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Sato M.
        • Motoyoshi M.
        • Hirabayashi M.
        • Hosoi K.
        • Mitsui N.
        • Shimizu N.
        Inclination of the occlusal plane is associated with the direction of the masticatory movement path.
        Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29: 21-25
        • Fayaz A.
        • Hemmati M.
        • Mirhashemi F.S.
        • Memari Y.
        • Ansari G.
        Determination of incisal point as anterior guide to transfer maxillary casts to articulator: A pilot study.
        J Dent School Shahid Beheshti Uni Med Sci. 2018; 36: 7-11
        • Stade E.H.
        • Hanson J.G.
        • Baker C.L.
        Esthetic considerations in the use of face-bows.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1982; 48: 253-256
        • Pitchford J.H.
        A reevaluation of the axis-orbital plane and the use of orbitale in a facebow transfer record.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 66: 349-355
        • Nooji D.
        • Sajjan S.M.C.
        The third point of reference and its effect on the protrusive condylar guidance angles obtained in semi-adjustable articulator.
        J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2008; 8: 71-77
      1. The glossary of prosthodontic terms, 9th ed.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117: e1-e105
        • Gross M.
        • Nemcovsky C.
        • Friedlander L.D.
        Comparative study of condylar settings of three semiadjustable articulators.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1990; 3: 135-141
        • Nagy W.W.
        • Goldstein G.R.
        Facebow use in clinical prosthodontic practice.
        J Prosthodont. 2018; 28: 772-774
        • Maveli T.C.
        • Suprono M.S.
        • Kattadiyil M.T.
        • Goodacre C.J.
        In vitro comparison of the maxillary occlusal plane orientation obtained with five facebow systems.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 566-573
        • Ackerman J.L.
        • Proffit W.R.
        • Sarver D.M.
        • Ackerman M.B.
        • Kean M.R.
        Pitch, roll, and yaw: Describing the spatial orientation of dentofacial traits.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac. 2007; 131: 305-310
        • Preston J.D.
        A reassessment of the mandibular transverse horizontal axis theory.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1979; 41: 605-613
        • Koyano K.
        • Tsukiyama Y.
        • Kuwatsuru R.
        Rehabilitation of occlusion – science or art?.
        J Oral Rehabil. 2012; 39: 513-521
        • Shetty S.
        • Shenoy K.K.
        • Sabu A.
        Evaluation of accuracy of transfer of the maxillary occlusal cant of two articulators using two facebow/semi-adjustable articulator systems: An in vivo study.
        J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016; 16: 248-252
        • Weinberg L.A.
        An evaluation of the face-bow mounting.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1961; 11: 32-42
        • Trapozzano V.R.
        Law of articulation.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1963; 13: 34-44
        • Lumley J.S.P.
        • Craven J.L.
        • Abrahams P.H.
        • Tunstall R.G.
        Bailey & Love’s: Essential clinical anatomy.
        CRC Press, Boca Raton2018: 306-309
        • Ghodsi S.
        • Rasaeipour S.
        Revising average condylar inclinations using electronic pantograph assessment: A cross-sectional study.
        Dent Hypotheses. 2018; 9: 84-89
        • Boulos P.J.
        • Adib S.M.
        • Naltchayan L.J.
        The horizontal condylar inclination: Clinical comparison of different recording methods.
        Gen Dent. 2007; 55: 112-116
        • Olsson A.
        • Posselt U.
        Relationship of various skull reference lines.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1961; 11: 1045-1049
        • Posselt U.
        • Skytting B.
        Registration of the condyle path inclination: Variation using the Gysi technique.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1960; 10: 243-247
        • Posselt U.
        • Franzén G.
        Registration of the condyle path inclination by intraoral wax records: Variations in three instruments.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1960; 10: 441-454
        • Prajapati P.
        • Sethuraman R.
        • Naveen Y.G.
        • Patel J.
        A clinical study of the variation in horizontal condylar guidance obtained by using three anterior points of reference and two different articulator systems.
        Contemp Clin Dent. 2013; 4: 162-169
        • dos Santos J.
        • Nelson S.
        • Nowlin T.
        Comparison of condylar guidance setting obtained from a wax record versus an extraoral tracing: a pilot study.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89: 54-59
        • Posselt U.
        • Nevstedt P.
        Registration of the condyle path inclination by intraoral wax records-its practical value.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1961; 11: 43-47
        • Arstad T.
        The capsular ligaments of the temporomandibular joint and retrusion facets of the dentition in relationship to mandibular movements.
        A. W. Broggers Boktry A/S, Oslo1954: 12
        • Weinberg L.A.
        The transverse hinge axis: Real or imaginary.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1959; 9: 775-787
        • Brotman D.N.
        Hinge axes. Part II. Geometric significance of the transverse axis.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1960; 10: 631-636
        • Kois J.C.
        • Kois D.E.
        • Chaiyabutr Y.
        Occlusal errors generated at the maxillary incisal edge position related to discrepancies in the arbitrary horizontal axis location and to the thickness of the interocclusal record.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110: 414-419
        • Proschel P.A.
        • Thorsten M.
        • Morneburg T.
        Predicted incidence of excursive occlusal errors in common modes of articulator adjustment.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2000; 13: 303-310
        • Clayton J.
        Border positions and restoring occlusion.
        Dent Clin North Am. 1971; 15: 525-542
        • Seifert D.
        • Jerolimov V.
        • Carek V.
        • Ibrahimagić L.
        Relations of reference planes for orientation of the prosthetic plane.
        Acta Stomatol Croat. 2000; 34: 413-416
        • Kuroe K.
        • Rosas A.
        • Molleson T.
        Variations in the cranial base orientation and facial skeleton in dry skulls sampled from three major populations.
        Eur J Orthod. 2004; 26: 201-207
        • Zuckerman G.R.
        Practical considerations for using the face-bow for complete denture prosthodontics.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1985; 53: 219-221
        • Chiche G.J.
        • Aoshima H.
        Functional verses aesthetic articulation of maxillary anterior restorations.
        Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1997; 9: 335-342
        • Kois J.C.
        • Lee T.L.
        • Inventors; Panadent Corp., assignee
        Dento-Facial Analyzer.
        (United States patent US 6,582,931 B1)2003
        • Lux L.H.
        • Thompson G.A.
        • Waliszewski K.J.
        • Ziebert G.J.
        A comparison of the Kois Dento-Facial Analyzer System with an earbow for mounting a maxillary cast.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 432-439
        • Galanis A.
        • Ali M.
        • Belles D.
        • Koeppen R.G.
        A comparison of facebow and dento-facial analyzer mountings.
        Texas Dent J. 2013; 130: 1047-1053