A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Cerqueira, Nunes M.
Data de Publicação: 2012
Outros Autores: Özcan, Mutlu, Gonçalves, Marianna, Da Rocha, Daniel M., Vasconcellos, Diego K., Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP], Yener-Salihoğlu, Esra
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227115
Resumo: The aim of this study was to investigate the level of microstrain that is exerted during polymerization of acrylic resins used for splinting during implant impressions. Material and Methods: Two acrylic resins (GC Pattern Resin, Duralay II) and square transfer coping splinting methods were evaluated by means of strain gauge analysis. Two implants were embedded in a polyurethane block, and the abutments were positioned. Sixty specimens were prepared using two square transfer copings that were rigidly connected to each other using the acrylic resins. The specimens were randomly divided into three groups of 20 each for the splinting methods: Method 1 was a one-piece method; in method 2, the splint was separated and reconnected after 17 minutes; and in method 3, the splint was separated and reconnected after 24 hours. In each group, half the specimens were splinted with GC Pattern Resin and the other half were splinted with Duralay II. Three microstrain measurements were performed by four strain gauges placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane blocks at 5 hours after resin polymerization for all groups. The data were analyzed statistically. Results: Both resin type and splinting method significantly affected microstrain. Interaction terms were also significant. Method 1 in combination with Duralay II produced significantly higher microstrain (1,962.1 µe) than the other methods with this material (method 2: 241.1 µe; method 3: 181.5 µe). No significant difference was found between splinting methods in combination with GC Pattern Resin (method 1: 173.8 µe; method 2: 112.6 µe; method 3: 105.4 µe). Conclusions: Because of the high microstrain generated, Duralay II should not be used for one-piece acrylic resin splinting, and separation and reconnection are suggested. For GC Pattern Resin, variations in splinting methods did not significantly affect the microstrain created. © 2012 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.
id UNSP_d3786a09974a4d5411d205610190bbe0
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/227115
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressionsAcrylic resinMicrostrainOsseointegrated implantsSplinting techniquesStrain gaugeThe aim of this study was to investigate the level of microstrain that is exerted during polymerization of acrylic resins used for splinting during implant impressions. Material and Methods: Two acrylic resins (GC Pattern Resin, Duralay II) and square transfer coping splinting methods were evaluated by means of strain gauge analysis. Two implants were embedded in a polyurethane block, and the abutments were positioned. Sixty specimens were prepared using two square transfer copings that were rigidly connected to each other using the acrylic resins. The specimens were randomly divided into three groups of 20 each for the splinting methods: Method 1 was a one-piece method; in method 2, the splint was separated and reconnected after 17 minutes; and in method 3, the splint was separated and reconnected after 24 hours. In each group, half the specimens were splinted with GC Pattern Resin and the other half were splinted with Duralay II. Three microstrain measurements were performed by four strain gauges placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane blocks at 5 hours after resin polymerization for all groups. The data were analyzed statistically. Results: Both resin type and splinting method significantly affected microstrain. Interaction terms were also significant. Method 1 in combination with Duralay II produced significantly higher microstrain (1,962.1 µe) than the other methods with this material (method 2: 241.1 µe; method 3: 181.5 µe). No significant difference was found between splinting methods in combination with GC Pattern Resin (method 1: 173.8 µe; method 2: 112.6 µe; method 3: 105.4 µe). Conclusions: Because of the high microstrain generated, Duralay II should not be used for one-piece acrylic resin splinting, and separation and reconnection are suggested. For GC Pattern Resin, variations in splinting methods did not significantly affect the microstrain created. © 2012 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.Department of Dentistry Health Sciences Center Federal University of Santa Catarina, LimaDental Materials Unit University of Zürich Center for Dental and Oral Medicine Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science, ZürichDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics São Paulo State University São José dos Campos School of Dentistry, São José dos CamposUniversity of Yeditepe Department of Prosthodontics, IstanbulDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics São Paulo State University São José dos Campos School of Dentistry, São José dos CamposUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials ScienceUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)University of YeditepeCerqueira, Nunes M.Özcan, MutluGonçalves, MariannaDa Rocha, Daniel M.Vasconcellos, Diego K.Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP]Yener-Salihoğlu, Esra2022-04-29T06:48:19Z2022-04-29T06:48:19Z2012-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article341-345International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 27, n. 2, p. 341-345, 2012.0882-2786http://hdl.handle.net/11449/2271152-s2.0-84873037887Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-29T06:48:19Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/227115Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T21:51:58.793762Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
title A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
spellingShingle A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
Cerqueira, Nunes M.
Acrylic resin
Microstrain
Osseointegrated implants
Splinting techniques
Strain gauge
title_short A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
title_full A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
title_fullStr A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
title_full_unstemmed A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
title_sort A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
author Cerqueira, Nunes M.
author_facet Cerqueira, Nunes M.
Özcan, Mutlu
Gonçalves, Marianna
Da Rocha, Daniel M.
Vasconcellos, Diego K.
Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP]
Yener-Salihoğlu, Esra
author_role author
author2 Özcan, Mutlu
Gonçalves, Marianna
Da Rocha, Daniel M.
Vasconcellos, Diego K.
Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP]
Yener-Salihoğlu, Esra
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
University of Yeditepe
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Cerqueira, Nunes M.
Özcan, Mutlu
Gonçalves, Marianna
Da Rocha, Daniel M.
Vasconcellos, Diego K.
Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP]
Yener-Salihoğlu, Esra
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Acrylic resin
Microstrain
Osseointegrated implants
Splinting techniques
Strain gauge
topic Acrylic resin
Microstrain
Osseointegrated implants
Splinting techniques
Strain gauge
description The aim of this study was to investigate the level of microstrain that is exerted during polymerization of acrylic resins used for splinting during implant impressions. Material and Methods: Two acrylic resins (GC Pattern Resin, Duralay II) and square transfer coping splinting methods were evaluated by means of strain gauge analysis. Two implants were embedded in a polyurethane block, and the abutments were positioned. Sixty specimens were prepared using two square transfer copings that were rigidly connected to each other using the acrylic resins. The specimens were randomly divided into three groups of 20 each for the splinting methods: Method 1 was a one-piece method; in method 2, the splint was separated and reconnected after 17 minutes; and in method 3, the splint was separated and reconnected after 24 hours. In each group, half the specimens were splinted with GC Pattern Resin and the other half were splinted with Duralay II. Three microstrain measurements were performed by four strain gauges placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane blocks at 5 hours after resin polymerization for all groups. The data were analyzed statistically. Results: Both resin type and splinting method significantly affected microstrain. Interaction terms were also significant. Method 1 in combination with Duralay II produced significantly higher microstrain (1,962.1 µe) than the other methods with this material (method 2: 241.1 µe; method 3: 181.5 µe). No significant difference was found between splinting methods in combination with GC Pattern Resin (method 1: 173.8 µe; method 2: 112.6 µe; method 3: 105.4 µe). Conclusions: Because of the high microstrain generated, Duralay II should not be used for one-piece acrylic resin splinting, and separation and reconnection are suggested. For GC Pattern Resin, variations in splinting methods did not significantly affect the microstrain created. © 2012 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2012-01-01
2022-04-29T06:48:19Z
2022-04-29T06:48:19Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 27, n. 2, p. 341-345, 2012.
0882-2786
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227115
2-s2.0-84873037887
identifier_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 27, n. 2, p. 341-345, 2012.
0882-2786
2-s2.0-84873037887
url http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227115
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 341-345
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808129367443767296