|
|
|
Giuseppangelo Fonzi: Industrial Fabrication
Promoter of Porcelain Prosthetics Journal of the History of Dentistry/Vol. 47, No. 2/July 1999 pp 79-82 |
||||
|
by Bernard Kurdvk
(Member of research group in ancient odontological texts and Frenciz research team in Dental Art History. DR. KURDYK is an assistant at the Faculty of Dental Surgery, Paris V and at the Parisian Hospitals. Correspondence: 2, rue de Monttessuy, 75007, Paris, France.) The use of porcelain in dental art dates back to the middle of the 18th century. An apothecary at Saint Germain-en-Laye by the name of Duchateau is the first to have been known to manufacture prostheses neither in bone nor in wood, but in imputrefiable materials. Then, Nicolas Dubois de Chémant, Parisian dentist and surgeon, modified the paste composition in porcelain and more useable results were obtained. A 15-year apprenticeship would follow before "dental fabrication and denture paste from incorruptible minerals without putrefaction" was made on September 16,1791. However these prostheses were manufactured from a single large piece, which, according to critics, hindered the denture's adjustment at the base of the mouth.
|
The gist of Fonzi's research lies in dissociating mineral teeth from their support during the prosthetic elaboration process. This represents a fundamental advance in the construction of prosthetic denture elements. Dubois de Chémant and those after him followed and copied his way of manufacturing dentures that entailed the construction of a large artificial bloc with respect to the form of the edentulous arch for each patient (Dubois de Chémant, 1788 and 1824). Such construction brought with it all the risks of failure due to the shrinkage inherent in the paste cushion.
In contrast, Fonzi's method eliminates this difficulty by preparing and manufacturing independently the teeth and their anatomic supports. This resolved, the ease and speed in regard to the manufacture of the denture are increased irrespective of the type of edentulous arch or the prosthesis. To develop this technique, Fonzi developed a procedure that binds together the teeth and the denture base. His idea was to include a clamp (stud) in each tooth (Fig. 2, 3, and 4). The stud was first made of gold, but its low fusion temperature and very high malleability hindered it from forming a stable and rigid bond. Gold was then replaced by platinum. Being newly discovered, platinum's properties were not known until 1748. It is a metal that is strong, adhesive, ductile, and flexible, but, with the same dilatation co-efficient as that of glass. The bond with the ceramic teeth, is therefore, readily made and remains stable in the denture base. In 1807, Fonzi demonstrated his discovery to the Academy of Sciences. A commission comprised of Tenon, Gay-Lussac and Sabatier was formed and it presented its findings to a meeting on June 8,1807. The commission demonstrated Fonzi's procedure which touts (1) speed of manufacture, (2) esthetic appeals, and (3) ingenuity, all combined in one. The advantage of Fonzi's teeth lies in the fact that:
Paradoxically, the commission's conclusion was very cautiously worded, even negative. In their eyes, Fonzi's invention was "a success too shaky and whose importance being too light to warrant approval." Such conclusions and observations did not discourage Fonzi. On February 4, 1808, he turned the Athénée des Arts (High School of Arts) where a commission was charged with examining his mineral teeth, the fabrication pro cedure, and the application of his prosthesis. The resulting report was presented on the 14th of March and published the 16th of May 1808 in the journal des Arts, des Sciences, de la Littérature et de la Politique. At the outset, Fonzi was congratulated for having brought together in his work not only the artistic talents, but also those of a biologist, physician, and chemist. It is this different approach that permitted him to arrive at the invention of terro-metallic teeth while eliminating the inconvenience of other materials. A few supplementary modifications followed. |
|||
| Journal of the History of Dentistry/Vol. 47, No. 2/july 1999 |
page 79
|
|||
|
|
||||
![]() Fig. 2. Placket of Fonzi's teeth. (Musée P. Fauchard, Paris). In 1808 Fonzi made "elastic" clasps in the area of partial prosthetics, which did away with the encompassing bands around the residual teeth: the circumferential, or so-called "modern," clasp still in use today was thus developed. Further, he interspersed the crochets for esthetic appeal, a subject of current discussion!
Afterward, he only had to mount the teeth in relation to those missing, in the patient, and solder them to the metal base. |
The commission's conclusion was more favorable since they judged that this invention should be welcomed positively and that Fonzi deserved "the maxi mum recompense possible under the rules." Fonzi was thus awarded a gold medal and a crown. His artistic reputation was secure, and it spread with him wherever he travelled.
The article in the journal des Arts, des Sciences, de la Littérature et de la Politique concludes with a note explaining that given the abundance of reports from the Athénée des Arts (High School of Arts), the sequel to the reports on prosthetic teeth would be published in the following issue. It was not to be, however, and it was not until the issue dated June 14, 1808 that the editors published the terro metallic tooth article. The rea son for the delav can be traced to the protest surrounding the awards and honors given to Fonzi.
We find this again involved Dubois-Foucou, a dentist enjoying a vast reputation at Paris, member of several scientific research groups, dentist to the King and the roval family, then surgeon-dentist of the Emperor and Empress. Initially, during the first tests bv Dubois de Chémant, he was opposed to the usage of porcelain in prosthesis; later Dubois-Foucou became a staunch supporter of this material. He went to war against this "foreign dentist, to whom one must teach French," a means for him to side against the terro-metallic teeth in favor of his own composition (Dubois-Foucou, 1808). Fonzi had two advantages over his jealous rival: first, his profound scientific knowledge, notably in chemistry, and second, his warm and creative spirit. |
|||
| Journal of the History of Dentistry/Vol. 47, No. 2/july 1999 |
page 80-81
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
On February 16, 1809, a new report insisted on the mode of tooth fabrication and the porcelain denture which was far from achieving- the satisfactory degree required. Despite the various modes of fabrication employed by different dentists, no one was able to imitate nature. That was why in the eyes of the physicians it was illusionary to reme@v a lost tooth. Consequently, the polemic surrounding Ricci's challenge to Fonzi's procedure did not take place; the School of Medicine had yet to pronounce judgement on the matter. Finally on February 26,1809, in a response to the Interior Minister, it said that "the School of Medicine has no reason to take up the discussion." Following which, Fonzi published a work in 1809 titled Response to Mr. Dubois-Foucou, Surgeon-Dentist, on the Brochure He Published in 1808 under the title 'Expose on the New, Procedures for the Conception of the Said Teeth' and on the Letter Addressed to the Physicians. In this work, Fonzi developed his riposte; point by point he responded to Dubois-Foucou's attacks. First, Fonzi explained that his attacker's ability resided in the latter's capacity to extract the teeth rather than the manufacture of prostheses appropriate to the patients' needs, perpetuating thus the "Ancien" tradition. Then, from Dubois-Foucou's demonstration of his own composition Fonzi pointed out the ignorance of his rival, in particular the latter's weakness in chemistry. Fonzi went on to justify the necessity of separating the teeth from the base during the prosthesis preparation process. "If it is about," wrote Fonzi, "constructing a piece that has an equal superficies, it is undoubtedly easy to enlarge it by calculating the shrinkage so that it can, after being baked, coincide with the model. But, if it is a piece of irregular superficies, with many variations of small protrusions and intrusions, such as those found in an edentulous jaw, or one with solid stumps that is rather firm which are needed to make the pressure evener, or one which has teeth with the stumps and these protrusions and intrusions, how is it possible to calculate the shrink age, and be able to make it coincide with the jaw whose parts are irregular? This is an essential condition for otherwise the pressure would not be equal on all the superficies. It cannot be in just some points, and it must continue to work in spite of irritation, inflammation, pain, all of which would stop the most important function ordained by nature: mastication. Such a piece would not be any good, save for parade; it would have no use. I challenge Mr. Dubois-Foucou to make, following his procedures, a denture that would coincide with all the irregularities of a jaw."
In his conclusion, Fonzi did not hesitate to make the offer of providing to all dentists, including Dubois Foucou, his terro-metallic teeth so that they could avoid the recourse of using corpse teeth. In the end, he explained his reasoning, which contrary to that the other practitioners, purely philanthropic, seeking only to bring the benefits of his discovery to society. |
"I will judge myself," Fonzi concluded, "to be more happy by simplifying the step of those coming after me and stopping, in their favor, all the ruses of the enemy, their jealousy, their rivalries in an art whose theoretical and practical uniformity will finally be fixated and permanent."
From Fonzi's conclusion we draw two conclusions: First, is that Fonzi tried to respond to the criticisms made by the School of Medicine at Paris by separating himself from the financial aspect. Second, and here is the major part, he sought to distribute his fabricated teeth "through a chain" of his colleagues. The idea of industrial fabrication of prosthetic teeth was developed. This idea did not take off until much later; tradition and scorn prevailed over technological novelty.
|
|||
| Journal of the History of Dentistry/Vol. 47, No. 2/july 1999 |
page 81-82
|
|||
Please write the Journal of the History of Dentistry for more information
or for permission to copy and distribute
Do not copy or distribute without express permission of the authors
please click on Order Form for subscription information
Please send inquiries to: Richard A. Kozal, Secretary / Treasurer, or call 1-800-232-0099 updated:
