Cargando…

Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants

The longevity of prosthetic rehabilitation is determined by the stability of the implant and abutment interfaces. True morse taper connections on dental restorations have been effective, however activation force still empirical. This work compared the activation strength and internal contact of Mors...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado, Stabile, Glaykon Alex Vitti, Felizardo, Klissia Romero, dos Santos, Sérgio Eduardo Ramos, Berger, Sandrine Bittencourt, Guiraldo, Ricardo Danil, Gonini, Alcides Gonini, Lopes, Murilo Baena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9645169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36287501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440202205084
_version_ 1784826909347020800
author dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado
Stabile, Glaykon Alex Vitti
Felizardo, Klissia Romero
dos Santos, Sérgio Eduardo Ramos
Berger, Sandrine Bittencourt
Guiraldo, Ricardo Danil
Gonini, Alcides Gonini
Lopes, Murilo Baena
author_facet dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado
Stabile, Glaykon Alex Vitti
Felizardo, Klissia Romero
dos Santos, Sérgio Eduardo Ramos
Berger, Sandrine Bittencourt
Guiraldo, Ricardo Danil
Gonini, Alcides Gonini
Lopes, Murilo Baena
author_sort dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado
collection PubMed
description The longevity of prosthetic rehabilitation is determined by the stability of the implant and abutment interfaces. True morse taper connections on dental restorations have been effective, however activation force still empirical. This work compared the activation strength and internal contact of Morse taper system according to the removal force. Eighty sets, composed of implants and prosthetic abutments, were evaluated with different internal contact areas; 15.12mm(2) (G3.3) and 21.25mm(2) (G4.3). The specimens were activated at 0° and 30°, with loads of 10, 20, 40 and 60N. The specimens were submitted to tensile test and the data to ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (α=0.05). Representative specimens were examined under SEM. Removal force of G3.3 (2.15±1.33MPa) did not differed to G4.3 (1.99±1.03MPa). The activation at 0º (2.95±0.98MPa) statistically differed to 30º (1.19±0.54MPa). The 60N load was statistically superior for G3.3 and there was no statistical difference between 20N to 60N in G4.3. The values of 10N at 30(o) and 20N at the long axis of the morse taper implant, independent of the frictional contact area showed the best settlement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9645169
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96451692022-11-14 Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado Stabile, Glaykon Alex Vitti Felizardo, Klissia Romero dos Santos, Sérgio Eduardo Ramos Berger, Sandrine Bittencourt Guiraldo, Ricardo Danil Gonini, Alcides Gonini Lopes, Murilo Baena Braz Dent J Article The longevity of prosthetic rehabilitation is determined by the stability of the implant and abutment interfaces. True morse taper connections on dental restorations have been effective, however activation force still empirical. This work compared the activation strength and internal contact of Morse taper system according to the removal force. Eighty sets, composed of implants and prosthetic abutments, were evaluated with different internal contact areas; 15.12mm(2) (G3.3) and 21.25mm(2) (G4.3). The specimens were activated at 0° and 30°, with loads of 10, 20, 40 and 60N. The specimens were submitted to tensile test and the data to ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (α=0.05). Representative specimens were examined under SEM. Removal force of G3.3 (2.15±1.33MPa) did not differed to G4.3 (1.99±1.03MPa). The activation at 0º (2.95±0.98MPa) statistically differed to 30º (1.19±0.54MPa). The 60N load was statistically superior for G3.3 and there was no statistical difference between 20N to 60N in G4.3. The values of 10N at 30(o) and 20N at the long axis of the morse taper implant, independent of the frictional contact area showed the best settlement. Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto 2022-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9645169/ /pubmed/36287501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440202205084 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
spellingShingle Article
dos Santos, Angelo Marcelo Tirado
Stabile, Glaykon Alex Vitti
Felizardo, Klissia Romero
dos Santos, Sérgio Eduardo Ramos
Berger, Sandrine Bittencourt
Guiraldo, Ricardo Danil
Gonini, Alcides Gonini
Lopes, Murilo Baena
Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title_full Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title_fullStr Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title_short Evaluation of Removal Force in Prosthetic Components of Morse Taper Dental Implants
title_sort evaluation of removal force in prosthetic components of morse taper dental implants
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9645169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36287501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440202205084
work_keys_str_mv AT dossantosangelomarcelotirado evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT stabileglaykonalexvitti evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT felizardoklissiaromero evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT dossantossergioeduardoramos evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT bergersandrinebittencourt evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT guiraldoricardodanil evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT goninialcidesgonini evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants
AT lopesmurilobaena evaluationofremovalforceinprostheticcomponentsofmorsetaperdentalimplants