Rodrigues Vinícius-Anéas, Dal Piva Amanda-Maria-de Oliveira, Yamaguchi Claudio-Akira, Borges Alexandre-Luiz-Souto, Mukai Marcio-Katsuyoshi, Tribst João-Paulo-Mendes
DDs, MSc, PhD, Department of Dental Materials and Proshodontics, Faculty of Pindamon-hangaba (FUNVIC), Pindamonhangaba/SP, Brazil.
DDs, MSc, PhD, Department of Dental Materials and Proshodontics, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, São José dos Campos / SP, Brazil.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 May 1;12(5):e433-e439. doi: 10.4317/jced.56292. eCollection 2020 May.
This study evaluated the effect of framework type on the survival probability of temporary implant-supported crowns and on the implant platform structure after dynamic fatigue.
Thirty (30) external hexagon implants (3.75 x 10 mm) were embedded in acrylic resin following the ISO-14801. Standardized temporary crowns (n=10, N=30) were manufactured in acrylic resin and divided according to the framework type: Total plastic, Plastic with CoCr base and Titanium. The crowns were installed onto the implants (20N.cm) and fatigued (100N, 2 Hz) to determine the crowns' survival probability for missions of 300.000 and 600.000 cycles. Fatigue data were submitted to the Kaplan-Meier test followed by Wilcoxon and Log Rank, all with α = 5%. The implant platforms were parametrically inspected based on the scanning before and after the fatigue to evaluate the damage. The strain values were analyzed using One-way ANOVA and Tukey test, all with α = 5%.
ANOVA revealed that the Total plastic showed less implant damage (-0.07 ± -0.03 mm) than the Plastic with CoCr base (-0.08 ± -0.04 mm) and the Titanium (-0.10 ± -0.01 mm) frameworks. Therefore, the framework type to manufacture implant-supported temporary crowns influences the fatigue survival of the restoration and the implant platform damage. The Plastic with CoCr base and Titanium frameworks showed superior reliability than the Total plastic framework which could not survive 600,000 cycles.
The Plastic with CoCr base and the Titanium framework are suitable for restorations over 3 months in use, without a difference in the implant platform damage. Implant dentistry, axial loading, occlusion, methodo-logical study.
本研究评估了框架类型对临时种植体支持冠的存活概率以及动态疲劳后种植体平台结构的影响。
按照ISO - 14801标准,将30颗(3.75×10 mm)外六角种植体植入丙烯酸树脂中。用丙烯酸树脂制作标准化临时冠(n = 10,N = 30),并根据框架类型进行划分:全塑料、带钴铬基底的塑料和钛。将冠安装到种植体上(20N.cm)并进行疲劳测试(100N,2Hz),以确定冠在300,000次和600,000次循环任务中的存活概率。疲劳数据进行Kaplan - Meier检验,随后进行Wilcoxon和Log Rank检验,所有检验的α = 5%。基于疲劳前后的扫描对种植体平台进行参数检查以评估损伤情况。使用单因素方差分析和Tukey检验分析应变值,所有检验的α = 5%。
方差分析显示,全塑料框架对种植体造成的损伤(-0.07± - 0.03 mm)小于带钴铬基底的塑料框架(-0.08± - 0.04 mm)和钛框架(-0.10± - 0.01 mm)。因此,制造种植体支持临时冠的框架类型会影响修复体的疲劳存活率以及种植体平台损伤情况。带钴铬基底的塑料框架和钛框架显示出比全塑料框架更高的可靠性,全塑料框架无法承受600,000次循环。
带钴铬基底的塑料框架和钛框架适用于使用超过3个月的修复体,在种植体平台损伤方面无差异。种植牙学、轴向负荷、咬合、方法学研究。