Abstract
Dental implants could give back function, esthetics and quality of life to patients. The correct choice of the implant, especially in borderline cases, is essential for a satisfactory result. Aim: Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior of Morse taper implants with two different prosthetic interfaces. Methods: Twenty self-locking Morse taper implants, 2.9 mm in diameter (FAC), and 20 Morse taper implants, 3.5 mm in diameter (CM) were divided into two groups (n=10), and submitted to strength to failure test, optical microscopic evaluation of fracture, metallographic analysis of the alloy, finite element analysis (FEA) and strain gauge test. A Student’s t test (α = 0.05) was made for a statistical analysis. Results: For the strength to failure test, a statistically difference was observed (p <0.001) between FAC (225.0 ± 19.8 N) and CM (397.3 ± 12.5 N). The optical microscopic evaluation demonstrated a fracture pattern that corroborated with FEA´s results. The metallographic analysis determined that the implants of the FAC group have titanium-aluminum-vanadium alloy in their composition. In the strain gauge test, there was no statistical difference (p = 0.833) between CM (1064.8 ± 575.04 μS) and FAC (1002.2 ± 657.6 μS) groups. Conclusion: Based on the results obtained in this study, ultra-narrow implants (FAC) should ideally be restricted to areas with low masticatory effort.
Publisher
Universidade Estadual de Campinas
Reference34 articles.
1. Anitua E, Errazquin JM, de Pedro J, Barrio P, Begoña L, Orive G. Clinical evaluation of Tiny® 2.5- and 3.0-mm narrow-diameter implants as definitive implants in different clinical situations: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2010 Winter;3(4):315-22.
2. Froum SJ, Cho SC, Cho YS, Elian N, Tarnow D. Narrow-diameter implants: a restorative option for limited interdental space. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007 Oct;27(5):449-55.
3. Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Tecucianu JF, Celletti R, Lazzara R. Small-diameter implants: indications and contraindications. J Esthet Dent. 2000;12(4):186-94. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2000.tb00221.x.
4. Park JY, Koo KT, Kim TI, Seol YJ, Lee YM, Ku Y, et al. Socket preservation using deproteinized horse-derived bone mineral. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2010 Oct;40(5):227-31. doi: 10.5051/jpis.2010.40.5.227.
5. Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Feb;32(2):212-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00642.x.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献