期刊文献+

New Mini Dental Implant Attachments versus O-ring Attachment after Cyclic Aging: Analysis of Retention Strength and Gap Space

New Mini Dental Implant Attachments versus O-ring Attachment after Cyclic Aging: Analysis of Retention Strength and Gap Space
下载PDF
导出
摘要 Overdenture as a treatment modality for both partially and fully edentulous patients is costeffective and less expensive. The purpose of the present study was to examine the newly fabricated attachments by comparing them with conventional O-ring attachment in vitro in terms of retention force and cyclic aging resistance. A total of 150 samples were prepared and divided into five groups according to the materials used(O-ring attachment, Deflex M10 XR, Deflex Classic SR, Deflex Acrilato FD, and flexible acrylic resin). The retention force of different attachments was measured by a mini dental implant after three subsequent aging(0, 63, and 126) cycles in the circumstances similar to the oral environment. The gap space between the head of the implant and the inner surface of the attachments was detected. Two-way analysis of variance(ANOVA) analysis with multiple comparisons test was applied for statistical analysis. The results showed that Deflex M10 XR had the highest retention force and the lowest gap space after cyclic aging; in addition, by comparing the relative force reduction, the lowest values were obtained in the O-ring attachment and the highest values in the flexible acrylic resin attachment. The retention force measured after cyclic aging for the Deflex M10 XR attachment was greatly improved when compared with the O-ring attachment and other types of attachment materials; in addition, the Deflex M10 XR attachment exhibited the minimum gap space between the inner surface and the mini dental implant head. In conclusion, Deflex M10 XR has the ability to withstand weathering conditions and retains its durable and retentive properties after aging when compared with other attachments. Overdenture as a treatment modality for both partially and fully edentulous patients is costeffective and less expensive. The purpose of the present study was to examine the newly fabricated attachments by comparing them with conventional O-ring attachment in vitro in terms of retention force and cyclic aging resistance. A total of 150 samples were prepared and divided into five groups according to the materials used(O-ring attachment, Deflex M10 XR, Deflex Classic SR, Deflex Acrilato FD, and flexible acrylic resin). The retention force of different attachments was measured by a mini dental implant after three subsequent aging(0, 63, and 126) cycles in the circumstances similar to the oral environment. The gap space between the head of the implant and the inner surface of the attachments was detected. Two-way analysis of variance(ANOVA) analysis with multiple comparisons test was applied for statistical analysis. The results showed that Deflex M10 XR had the highest retention force and the lowest gap space after cyclic aging; in addition, by comparing the relative force reduction, the lowest values were obtained in the O-ring attachment and the highest values in the flexible acrylic resin attachment. The retention force measured after cyclic aging for the Deflex M10 XR attachment was greatly improved when compared with the O-ring attachment and other types of attachment materials; in addition, the Deflex M10 XR attachment exhibited the minimum gap space between the inner surface and the mini dental implant head. In conclusion, Deflex M10 XR has the ability to withstand weathering conditions and retains its durable and retentive properties after aging when compared with other attachments.
出处 《Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology(Medical Sciences)》 SCIE CAS 2017年第3期419-424,共6页 华中科技大学学报(医学英德文版)
关键词 mini dental implant O-ring attachment flexible acrylic resin deflex material mini dental implant O-ring attachment flexible acrylic resin deflex material
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献23

  • 1Mericske-Stern R. Overdentures with roots or implants for elderly patients:A comparison[J].Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,1994,(05):543-550.
  • 2Wrstmann B,Budtz-Jφrgensen E,Jepson N. Indications for removable partial dentures:A literature review[J].International Journal of Prosthodontics,2005,(02):139-145.
  • 3Kaufmann R,Friedli M,Hug S. Removable dentures with implant support in strategic positions followed for up to 8 years[J].Irit J Prosthodont,2009,(03):233-241.
  • 4Doukas D,Michelinakis G,Smith PW. The influence of interimplant distance and attachment type on the retention characteristics of mandibular overdentures on 2 implants:6-month fatigue retention values[J].International Journal of Prosthodontics,2008,(02):152-154.
  • 5Setz I,Lee SH,Engel E. Retention of prefabricated attachments for implant stabilized overdentures in the edentulous mandible:an in vitro study[J].Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,1998,(03):323-329.
  • 6Petropoulos VC,Smith W. Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments[J].International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants,2002,(04):526-535.
  • 7Van Kampen F,Cune M,Van der Bilt A. Retention and postinsertion maintenance of bar-clip,ball and magnet attachments in mandibular implant overdenture treatment:an in vivo comparison after 3 months of function[J].Clinical Oral Implants Research,2003,(06):720-726.
  • 8Visser A,Meijer H,Raghoebar GM. Implant-retained mandibular overdentures versus conventional dentures:10 years of care and aftercare[J].International Journal of Prosthodontics,2006,(03):271-278.
  • 9Liddelow GJ,Henry PJ. A prospective study of immediately loaded single implant-retained mandibular overdentures:Preliminary one-year results[J].Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,2007,(6 Suppl):S126-S137.
  • 10Marzola R,Scotti R,Fazi G. Immediate loading of two implants supporting a ball attachment-retained mandibular overdenture:A prospective clinical study[J].CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH,2007,(03):136-143.

共引文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部