A strain gauge analysis of microstrain induced by various splinting methods and acrylic resin types for implant impressions
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2012 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
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 |