Lopes Guilherme da Rocha Scalzer, Matos Jefferson David Melo de, Queiroz Daher Antonio, Tribst João Paulo Mendes, Ramos Nathália de Carvalho, Rocha Mateus Garcia, Barbosa Adriano Baldotto, Bottino Marco Antonio, Borges Alexandre Luiz Souto, Nishioka Renato Sussumu
Department of Biomaterials, Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp), São José dos Campos 12245-000, Brazil.
Center for Dental Biomaterials, Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, University of Florida (UF Health), Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Materials (Basel). 2022 Sep 8;15(18):6235. doi: 10.3390/ma15186235.
This study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of Morse taper implants using different abutments (CMN abutment [(CMN Group] and miniconical abutments [MC Group]), indicated to support a screw-retained 3-unit fixed partial denture. For the in vitro test, polyurethane blocks were fabricated for both groups ( = 10) and received three implants in the "offset" configuration and their respective abutments (CMN or MC) with a 3-unit fixed partial denture. Four strain gauges were bonded to the surface of each block. For the finite element analysis, 3D models of both groups were created and exported to the analysis software to perform static structural analysis. All structures were considered homogeneous, isotropic, and elastic. The contacts were considered non-linear with a friction coefficient of 0.3 between metallic structures and considered bonded between the implant and substrate. An axial load of 300 N was applied in three points (A, B, and C) for both methods. The microstrain and the maximum principal stress were considered as analysis criteria. The obtained data were submitted to the Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, and Dunn's multiple comparison test (α = 5%). The results obtained by strain gauge showed no statistical difference ( = 0.879) between the CMN (645.3 ± 309.2 με) and MC (639.3 ± 278.8 με) and allowed the validation of computational models with a difference of 6.3% and 6.4% for the microstrains in the CMN and MC groups, respectively. Similarly, the results presented by the computational models showed no statistical difference ( = 0.932) for the CMN (605.1 ± 358.6 με) and MC (598.7 ± 357.9 με) groups. The study concluded that under favorable conditions the use of CMN or MP abutments to support a fixed partial denture can be indicated.
本研究旨在评估使用不同基台(CMN基台[CMN组]和微型锥形基台[MC组])的莫氏锥度种植体的生物力学行为,这些基台用于支持螺丝固位的3单位固定局部义齿。对于体外测试,为两组(每组n = 10)制作聚氨酯块,并在“偏移”配置中植入三个种植体及其各自的基台(CMN或MC),并连接一个3单位固定局部义齿。在每个块体表面粘贴四个应变片。对于有限元分析,创建两组的三维模型并导出到分析软件中进行静态结构分析。所有结构均被视为均质、各向同性和弹性的。金属结构之间的接触被视为非线性,摩擦系数为0.3,种植体与基底之间的接触被视为粘结。两种方法均在三个点(A、B和C)施加300 N的轴向载荷。将微应变和最大主应力作为分析标准。将获得的数据提交给曼-惠特尼检验、克鲁斯卡尔-沃利斯检验和邓恩多重比较检验(α = 5%)。应变片获得的结果显示,CMN组(645.3±309.2 με)和MC组(639.3±278.8 με)之间无统计学差异(p = 0.879),并验证了计算模型,CMN组和MC组微应变的差异分别为6.3%和6.4%。同样,计算模型给出的结果显示,CMN组(605.1±358.6 με)和MC组(598.7±357.9 με)之间无统计学差异(p = 0.932)。该研究得出结论,在有利条件下,可以使用CMN或MP基台来支持固定局部义齿。