Suppr超能文献

在铸造牙钉蜡型技术中,火焰喷枪与电弧铸造法的比较。

Comparison of torch with electric arc casting in the lost wax technique for the cast dental stud protocol.

作者信息

Quispe Mamani Víctor Hugo Gonzalo, Luna Castillo César Alberto, Alanoca Sejje Dina Miryan, Orrego-Ferreyros Luis Alexander

机构信息

Universidad César Vallejo, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Escuela Profesional de Estomatología, Piura, Perú.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2025 Apr 29;20(4):e0321724. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321724. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the compressive strength, microstructural characteristics, and cost-effectiveness of cast dental posts fabricated using two techniques: torch casting (TC) and electric arc casting (EAC), both integral to the lost wax method. Employing an applied research approach with an experimental design, the study analyzed 40 non-precious gold (NPG) alloy cast posts, divided equally into two groups of 20 for each technique. The selection process was non-probabilistic and based on convenience, with specific inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure precision and relevance. The results reveal a significant advantage for the EAC technique. In Essay 1, EAC posts exhibited a mean compressive strength of 206.102 MPa, compared to 157.207 MPa for TC posts. Similarly, in Essay 2, EAC posts showed a mean strength of 172.625 MPa versus 136.303 MPa for TC posts. These differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05), with EAC posts also displaying smaller failure diameters and areas, suggesting better load distribution. Morphological and microstructural analysis using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) revealed a porous surface with irregular topography in both techniques. However, EAC samples displayed crystalline growths within the copper matrix, indicating a non-homogeneous stoichiometry, while TC samples showed aluminum-enriched zones, suggesting a non-uniform elemental distribution. Chemical composition analysis via energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) identified copper (Cu) as the predominant element in both samples, with trace elements such as aluminum (Al), nickel (Ni), and iron (Fe) also present. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis further revealed distinct crystalline phases, with EAC samples exhibiting a higher proportion of Cu₃Zn and gamma-Fe phases compared to TC samples. A cost analysis using Python 3.13 and Monte Carlo simulation with 1,000 iterations revealed that EAC is more expensive, with a total cost per unit of 2.181compared to 1.467 for TC, primarily due to higher operational costs. The Mann-Whitney U test confirmed significant differences in cost distributions (p < 0.001), indicating that EAC has higher and more variable costs. In conclusion, the study demonstrates that EAC produces dental models with significantly higher compressive strength and a more refined microstructure compared to TC, enhancing restoration durability. However, its higher operational costs must be considered. These findings provide valuable information for dental professionals, particularly in low- to middle-income countries, and suggest that future research should explore additional properties such as corrosion resistance and biocompatibility to further validate the clinical applicability of these materials.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较采用两种技术制作的铸造牙科桩的抗压强度、微观结构特征和成本效益:火炬铸造(TC)和电弧铸造(EAC),这两种技术都是失蜡法的组成部分。本研究采用实验设计的应用研究方法,分析了40根非贵金属(NPG)合金铸造桩,每种技术平均分为两组,每组20个。选择过程是非概率性的,基于便利性,并设有特定的纳入和排除标准以确保准确性和相关性。结果显示EAC技术具有显著优势。在实验1中,EAC桩的平均抗压强度为206.102MPa,而TC桩为157.207MPa。同样,在实验2中,EAC桩的平均强度为172.625MPa,而TC桩为136.303MPa。这些差异具有统计学意义(p<0.05),EAC桩的破坏直径和面积也更小,表明其载荷分布更好。使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)进行的形态学和微观结构分析表明,两种技术的表面均为多孔且形貌不规则。然而,EAC样品在铜基体中显示出晶体生长,表明化学计量不均匀,而TC样品显示出富铝区,表明元素分布不均匀。通过能量色散光谱(EDS)进行的化学成分分析确定,两种样品中的主要元素均为铜(Cu),还存在铝(Al)、镍(Ni)和铁(Fe)等微量元素。X射线衍射(XRD)分析进一步揭示了不同的晶相,与TC样品相比,EAC样品中Cu₃Zn和γ-Fe相的比例更高。使用Python 3.13和1000次迭代的蒙特卡洛模拟进行的成本分析表明,EAC成本更高,单位总成本为2.181,而TC为1.467,主要是由于运营成本较高。曼-惠特尼U检验证实了成本分布存在显著差异(p<0.001),表明EAC的成本更高且更具波动性。总之,该研究表明,与TC相比,EAC制作的牙科模型具有显著更高的抗压强度和更精细的微观结构,提高了修复体的耐久性。然而,必须考虑其较高的运营成本。这些发现为牙科专业人员提供了有价值的信息,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家,并表明未来的研究应探索其他性能,如耐腐蚀性和生物相容性,以进一步验证这些材料的临床适用性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9655/12040153/a8be502fa92a/pone.0321724.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验