Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Brazilian Dental Journal |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402021000500067 |
Resumo: | Abstract This study evaluated the vertical misfit, passivity, and stress distribution after tightening the screws of different prosthesis. Two implants were used to simulate the rehabilitation of partially edentulous mandible space from the second premolar to the second molar. 40 three-element screw-retained fixed dental prosthesis with distal cantilever were fabricated and divided into four groups according to the method of production of framework (n = 10): G1 = conventional casting one-piece framework, G2 = conventional casting sectioned and laser welding, G3 = conventional casting sectioned and tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding and G4 = framework obtained by CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) system. The vertical misfits (both screws tightened) and the passive fit (one screw tightened) were measured under a comparator optical microscope. The data was submitted to Shapiro-Wilk test to enable comparison with ANOVA followed by Tukey with Bonferroni adjust (α = .05). The qualitative analysis of the stress distribution was performed by the photoelastic method. The vertical misfit (both screws tightened) of the G2 (24 μm) and G3 (27 μm) were significantly higher than G4 (10 μm) (p = 0,006). The passive fit (for the non-tightened) of the G1(64 μm) and G3 (61 μm) were significantly higher than the G4 (32 μm) (p=0,009). G1 showed high stress between the implants in the photoelastic analysis and G4 presented lower stress. In conclusion, CAD/CAM method results in less vertical misfit, more passivity, and consequently better stress distribution to the bone. |
id |
FUNORP-1_73771e26f4e46e0f3c8a88ee19f1b43c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0103-64402021000500067 |
network_acronym_str |
FUNORP-1 |
network_name_str |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methodsDental implantscad-cam prosthetic misfitstress distribuitionAbstract This study evaluated the vertical misfit, passivity, and stress distribution after tightening the screws of different prosthesis. Two implants were used to simulate the rehabilitation of partially edentulous mandible space from the second premolar to the second molar. 40 three-element screw-retained fixed dental prosthesis with distal cantilever were fabricated and divided into four groups according to the method of production of framework (n = 10): G1 = conventional casting one-piece framework, G2 = conventional casting sectioned and laser welding, G3 = conventional casting sectioned and tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding and G4 = framework obtained by CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) system. The vertical misfits (both screws tightened) and the passive fit (one screw tightened) were measured under a comparator optical microscope. The data was submitted to Shapiro-Wilk test to enable comparison with ANOVA followed by Tukey with Bonferroni adjust (α = .05). The qualitative analysis of the stress distribution was performed by the photoelastic method. The vertical misfit (both screws tightened) of the G2 (24 μm) and G3 (27 μm) were significantly higher than G4 (10 μm) (p = 0,006). The passive fit (for the non-tightened) of the G1(64 μm) and G3 (61 μm) were significantly higher than the G4 (32 μm) (p=0,009). G1 showed high stress between the implants in the photoelastic analysis and G4 presented lower stress. In conclusion, CAD/CAM method results in less vertical misfit, more passivity, and consequently better stress distribution to the bone.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2021-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402021000500067Brazilian Dental Journal v.32 n.5 2021reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/0103-6440202104453info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessTonin,Bruna Santos HonórioPeixoto,Raniel FernandesFu,JingFreitas,Bruna Neves deMattos,Maria da Gloria Chiarello deMacedo,Ana Paulaeng2021-12-01T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402021000500067Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2021-12-01T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
title |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
spellingShingle |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods Tonin,Bruna Santos Honório Dental implants cad-cam prosthetic misfit stress distribuition |
title_short |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
title_full |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
title_fullStr |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
title_sort |
Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods |
author |
Tonin,Bruna Santos Honório |
author_facet |
Tonin,Bruna Santos Honório Peixoto,Raniel Fernandes Fu,Jing Freitas,Bruna Neves de Mattos,Maria da Gloria Chiarello de Macedo,Ana Paula |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Peixoto,Raniel Fernandes Fu,Jing Freitas,Bruna Neves de Mattos,Maria da Gloria Chiarello de Macedo,Ana Paula |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Tonin,Bruna Santos Honório Peixoto,Raniel Fernandes Fu,Jing Freitas,Bruna Neves de Mattos,Maria da Gloria Chiarello de Macedo,Ana Paula |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dental implants cad-cam prosthetic misfit stress distribuition |
topic |
Dental implants cad-cam prosthetic misfit stress distribuition |
description |
Abstract This study evaluated the vertical misfit, passivity, and stress distribution after tightening the screws of different prosthesis. Two implants were used to simulate the rehabilitation of partially edentulous mandible space from the second premolar to the second molar. 40 three-element screw-retained fixed dental prosthesis with distal cantilever were fabricated and divided into four groups according to the method of production of framework (n = 10): G1 = conventional casting one-piece framework, G2 = conventional casting sectioned and laser welding, G3 = conventional casting sectioned and tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding and G4 = framework obtained by CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) system. The vertical misfits (both screws tightened) and the passive fit (one screw tightened) were measured under a comparator optical microscope. The data was submitted to Shapiro-Wilk test to enable comparison with ANOVA followed by Tukey with Bonferroni adjust (α = .05). The qualitative analysis of the stress distribution was performed by the photoelastic method. The vertical misfit (both screws tightened) of the G2 (24 μm) and G3 (27 μm) were significantly higher than G4 (10 μm) (p = 0,006). The passive fit (for the non-tightened) of the G1(64 μm) and G3 (61 μm) were significantly higher than the G4 (32 μm) (p=0,009). G1 showed high stress between the implants in the photoelastic analysis and G4 presented lower stress. In conclusion, CAD/CAM method results in less vertical misfit, more passivity, and consequently better stress distribution to the bone. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-09-01 |
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=S0103-64402021000500067 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402021000500067 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0103-6440202104453 |
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 |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Dental Journal v.32 n.5 2021 reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) instacron:FUNORP |
instname_str |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) |
instacron_str |
FUNORP |
institution |
FUNORP |
reponame_str |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
collection |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br |
_version_ |
1754204096553811968 |