Cargando…

A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To find out and compare peri implant strain developed in four different types of implant supported prostheses i.e., cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted, screw retained splinted, screw retained non splinted. METHODOLOGY: Four implant analogues were placed in a p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rani, Ipsha, Shetty, Jayakar, Reddy, Vahini
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5450884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28584415
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.203195
_version_ 1783240073163046912
author Rani, Ipsha
Shetty, Jayakar
Reddy, Vahini
author_facet Rani, Ipsha
Shetty, Jayakar
Reddy, Vahini
author_sort Rani, Ipsha
collection PubMed
description AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To find out and compare peri implant strain developed in four different types of implant supported prostheses i.e., cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted, screw retained splinted, screw retained non splinted. METHODOLOGY: Four implant analogues were placed in a polyurethane mandibular model at the position of left and right first and second molar. Abutments were fixed to the implant at a torque of 25Ncm. Two such models were made. Four different prostheses were placed on abutment of each model i.e screw retained splinted, screw retained nonsplinted, cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted. Four strain gauges were attached on the model, two on the buccal and two on the lingual aspect of each implant. Static load of 400N was applied on the prosthesis using universal testing machine. Load application was done ten times for each model and peri implant strain was measured. RESULTS: The mean peri implant strain (±SD) generated was found to be highest in non-splinted screw retained (1397.70 ± 44.47 microstrains and 1265.90 ± 42.76 microstrains) and least in splinted cement retained (630.70 ± 31.98 microstrains and 519.60 ± 32.48 microstrains) in both 1(st) and 2(nd) molars respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Splinted crowns produce less peri implant strain when compared to non splinted crowns. Cement retained prosthesis produce less peri implant strain when compared to screw retained prosthesis. Least strain was observed in cement retained splinted crowns.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5450884
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54508842018-04-01 A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses Rani, Ipsha Shetty, Jayakar Reddy, Vahini J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To find out and compare peri implant strain developed in four different types of implant supported prostheses i.e., cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted, screw retained splinted, screw retained non splinted. METHODOLOGY: Four implant analogues were placed in a polyurethane mandibular model at the position of left and right first and second molar. Abutments were fixed to the implant at a torque of 25Ncm. Two such models were made. Four different prostheses were placed on abutment of each model i.e screw retained splinted, screw retained nonsplinted, cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted. Four strain gauges were attached on the model, two on the buccal and two on the lingual aspect of each implant. Static load of 400N was applied on the prosthesis using universal testing machine. Load application was done ten times for each model and peri implant strain was measured. RESULTS: The mean peri implant strain (±SD) generated was found to be highest in non-splinted screw retained (1397.70 ± 44.47 microstrains and 1265.90 ± 42.76 microstrains) and least in splinted cement retained (630.70 ± 31.98 microstrains and 519.60 ± 32.48 microstrains) in both 1(st) and 2(nd) molars respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Splinted crowns produce less peri implant strain when compared to non splinted crowns. Cement retained prosthesis produce less peri implant strain when compared to screw retained prosthesis. Least strain was observed in cement retained splinted crowns. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5450884/ /pubmed/28584415 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.203195 Text en Copyright: © 2017 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Rani, Ipsha
Shetty, Jayakar
Reddy, Vahini
A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title_full A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title_fullStr A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title_short A comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
title_sort comparison of peri-implant strain generated by different types of implant supported prostheses
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5450884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28584415
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.203195
work_keys_str_mv AT raniipsha acomparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses
AT shettyjayakar acomparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses
AT reddyvahini acomparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses
AT raniipsha comparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses
AT shettyjayakar comparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses
AT reddyvahini comparisonofperiimplantstraingeneratedbydifferenttypesofimplantsupportedprostheses