Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Colán Guzmán,Paola
Data de Publicação: 2008
Outros Autores: Freitas,Fernando Furtado Antunes de, Ferreira,Paulo Martins, Freitas,César Antunes de, Reis,Kátia Rodrigues
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572008000200006
Resumo: In long-term oral rehabilitation treatments, resistance of provisional crowns is a very important factor, especially in cases of an extensive edentulous distal space. The aim of this laboratorial study was to evaluate an acrylic resin cantilever-type prosthesis regarding the flexural strength of its in-balance portion as a function of its extension variation and reinforcement by two types of fibers (glass and polyaramid), considering that literature is not conclusive on this subject. Each specimen was composed by 3 total crowns at its mesial portion, each one attached to an implant component (abutment), while the distal portion (cantilever) had two crowns. Each specimen was constructed by injecting acrylic resin into a two-part silicone matrix placed on a metallic base. In each specimen, the crowns were fabricated with either acrylic resin (control group) or acrylic resin reinforced by glass (Fibrante, Angelus) or polyaramide (Kevlar 49, Du Pont) fibers. Compression load was applied on the cantilever, in a point located 7, 14 or 21 mm from the distal surface of the nearest crown with abutment, to simulate different extensions. The specimen was fixed on the metallic base and the force was applied until fracture in a universal test machine. Each one of the 9 sub-groups was composed by 10 specimens. Flexural strength means (in kgf) for the distances of 7, 14 and 21 mm were, respectively, 28.07, 8.27 and 6.39 for control group, 31.89, 9.18 and 5.16 for Kevlar 49 and 30.90, 9.31 and 6.86 for Fibrante. Data analysis ANOVA showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05) only regarding cantilever extension. Tukey's test detected significantly higher flexural strength for the 7 mm-distance, followed by 14 and 21 mm. Fracture was complete only on specimens of non-reinforced groups.
id USP-17_202a1e0866ac8a64400d3e2fd585bacb
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1678-77572008000200006
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporaryAcrylic resinsGlass fiberPolyaramideTemporary dental restorationProvisional prosthesisCantileverFlexural strengthIn long-term oral rehabilitation treatments, resistance of provisional crowns is a very important factor, especially in cases of an extensive edentulous distal space. The aim of this laboratorial study was to evaluate an acrylic resin cantilever-type prosthesis regarding the flexural strength of its in-balance portion as a function of its extension variation and reinforcement by two types of fibers (glass and polyaramid), considering that literature is not conclusive on this subject. Each specimen was composed by 3 total crowns at its mesial portion, each one attached to an implant component (abutment), while the distal portion (cantilever) had two crowns. Each specimen was constructed by injecting acrylic resin into a two-part silicone matrix placed on a metallic base. In each specimen, the crowns were fabricated with either acrylic resin (control group) or acrylic resin reinforced by glass (Fibrante, Angelus) or polyaramide (Kevlar 49, Du Pont) fibers. Compression load was applied on the cantilever, in a point located 7, 14 or 21 mm from the distal surface of the nearest crown with abutment, to simulate different extensions. The specimen was fixed on the metallic base and the force was applied until fracture in a universal test machine. Each one of the 9 sub-groups was composed by 10 specimens. Flexural strength means (in kgf) for the distances of 7, 14 and 21 mm were, respectively, 28.07, 8.27 and 6.39 for control group, 31.89, 9.18 and 5.16 for Kevlar 49 and 30.90, 9.31 and 6.86 for Fibrante. Data analysis ANOVA showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05) only regarding cantilever extension. Tukey's test detected significantly higher flexural strength for the 7 mm-distance, followed by 14 and 21 mm. Fracture was complete only on specimens of non-reinforced groups.Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP2008-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572008000200006Journal of Applied Oral Science v.16 n.2 2008reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP10.1590/S1678-77572008000200006info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessColán Guzmán,PaolaFreitas,Fernando Furtado Antunes deFerreira,Paulo MartinsFreitas,César Antunes deReis,Kátia Rodrigueseng2008-04-28T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1678-77572008000200006Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2008-04-28T00:00Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
title Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
spellingShingle Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
Colán Guzmán,Paola
Acrylic resins
Glass fiber
Polyaramide
Temporary dental restoration
Provisional prosthesis
Cantilever
Flexural strength
title_short Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
title_full Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
title_fullStr Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
title_full_unstemmed Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
title_sort Influence of different catilever extensions and glass or polyamaramid reinforcement fibers on fracture strength of implant-supported temporary
author Colán Guzmán,Paola
author_facet Colán Guzmán,Paola
Freitas,Fernando Furtado Antunes de
Ferreira,Paulo Martins
Freitas,César Antunes de
Reis,Kátia Rodrigues
author_role author
author2 Freitas,Fernando Furtado Antunes de
Ferreira,Paulo Martins
Freitas,César Antunes de
Reis,Kátia Rodrigues
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Colán Guzmán,Paola
Freitas,Fernando Furtado Antunes de
Ferreira,Paulo Martins
Freitas,César Antunes de
Reis,Kátia Rodrigues
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Acrylic resins
Glass fiber
Polyaramide
Temporary dental restoration
Provisional prosthesis
Cantilever
Flexural strength
topic Acrylic resins
Glass fiber
Polyaramide
Temporary dental restoration
Provisional prosthesis
Cantilever
Flexural strength
description In long-term oral rehabilitation treatments, resistance of provisional crowns is a very important factor, especially in cases of an extensive edentulous distal space. The aim of this laboratorial study was to evaluate an acrylic resin cantilever-type prosthesis regarding the flexural strength of its in-balance portion as a function of its extension variation and reinforcement by two types of fibers (glass and polyaramid), considering that literature is not conclusive on this subject. Each specimen was composed by 3 total crowns at its mesial portion, each one attached to an implant component (abutment), while the distal portion (cantilever) had two crowns. Each specimen was constructed by injecting acrylic resin into a two-part silicone matrix placed on a metallic base. In each specimen, the crowns were fabricated with either acrylic resin (control group) or acrylic resin reinforced by glass (Fibrante, Angelus) or polyaramide (Kevlar 49, Du Pont) fibers. Compression load was applied on the cantilever, in a point located 7, 14 or 21 mm from the distal surface of the nearest crown with abutment, to simulate different extensions. The specimen was fixed on the metallic base and the force was applied until fracture in a universal test machine. Each one of the 9 sub-groups was composed by 10 specimens. Flexural strength means (in kgf) for the distances of 7, 14 and 21 mm were, respectively, 28.07, 8.27 and 6.39 for control group, 31.89, 9.18 and 5.16 for Kevlar 49 and 30.90, 9.31 and 6.86 for Fibrante. Data analysis ANOVA showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05) only regarding cantilever extension. Tukey's test detected significantly higher flexural strength for the 7 mm-distance, followed by 14 and 21 mm. Fracture was complete only on specimens of non-reinforced groups.
publishDate 2008
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2008-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572008000200006
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572008000200006
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1678-77572008000200006
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science v.16 n.2 2008
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1748936434837880832