Cargando…
Biomechanical interactions of endodontically treated tooth implant-supported prosthesis under fatigue test with acoustic emission monitoring
BACKGROUND: This study investigated the biomechanical interactions in endodontically treated tooth implant-supported prosthesis (TISP) with implant system variations under dynamic cyclic loads monitored using the acoustic emission (AE) technique. METHODS: Macrostructure implants using a taper integr...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4765056/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26912169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-016-0140-y |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: This study investigated the biomechanical interactions in endodontically treated tooth implant-supported prosthesis (TISP) with implant system variations under dynamic cyclic loads monitored using the acoustic emission (AE) technique. METHODS: Macrostructure implants using a taper integrated screw-in (TIS; 2-piece implant) and a retaining-screw (RS; 3-piece implant) connected to an abutment were used for this investigation and their corresponding mechanical resistances in conformity with the ISO 14801 standard were evaluated. The endodontically treated TISP samples were constructed containing TIS and RS implants splinted to the second premolar with fatigue tests performed by applying occlusal force onto the premolar simulating the bending moment effect. The numbers of accumulated AE signals in the fatigue tests and failure modes for the sample were recorded to evaluate the mechanical resistance. RESULT: The maximum load in the static test for RS (3-piece) implant (797N) was significantly higher than that for the TIS (2-piece) implant (559N). Large deformations were found at abutment screws in both RS and TIS implants. Although the numbers of accumulated AE signals for the TIS implant (72511) were higher than those for the RS implant (437), statistical non-significant differences were found between TIS and RS implants. No obvious damage was noted in endodontically treated TISP samples using RS implants but two of the corresponding TIS implants fractured in the abutment screws. CONCLUSIONS: Splints with RS (3-piece) implant prosthesis produce better mechanical responses than the TIS (2-piece) implant when connected to an endodontically treated tooth restored with a post core and crown. |
---|