Abstract
AIM: The study aimed to compare two different methods for occlusal analysis and adjustment of implant-supported prostheses (computerized T-scan and articulating papers) regarding the stresses transmitted to the implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven patients with completely edentulous mandible opposing dentate maxilla have been selected and four implants have been inserted. Two identical mandibular zirconia implant supported prostheses have been constructed for each patient. Occlusal analysis and adjustments have been done using T-scan for one prosthesis and using articulating papers for the other prosthesis. Two identical acrylic casts for the mandibular arch (with four implant analogs on each cast) have been constructed for each patient. The prostheses on their acrylic casts were applied to cyclic loading using chewing simulator of 250,000 cycle (1 year loading). Strain gauges have been installed mesial and distal to each implant (28 implants of T-scan group and 28 implants of articulating paper group) and strain gauge analysis was conducted using the universal testing machine upon the application of bilateral and unilateral load after cyclic loading. Data were collected, tabulated, and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: Higher micro strain values were found around implants among articulating paper group than T-scan group and that difference was statistically insignificant under bilateral loading and statistically significant under unilateral loading.
CONCLUSION: T-scan allows better occlusal stresses distribution as it brings additional information regarding force intensity and occlusal timing resulting in less stresses transmitted around implants.
Publisher
Scientific Foundation SPIROSKI
Reference29 articles.
1. Kerstein RB, Lowe M, Harty M, Radke J. A force reproduction analysis of two recording sensors of a computerized occlusal analysis system. Cranio. 2006;24(1):15-24. https://doi.org/10.1179/crn.2006.004 PMid:16541841
2. Baba NZ, AlRumaih HS, Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ. Current techniques in CAD/CAM denture fabrication. J Acad Gen Dent. 2016;64(6):23-8. PMid:27814252
3. Kerstein RB. T-scan III applications in mixed arch and complete arch, implant-supported prosthodontics. Dent Implantol Update. 2008;19(7):49-53. PMid:18700457
4. Garg AK. Analyzing dental occlusion for implants: Tekscan’s TScan III. Dent Implantol Update. 2007;18(9):65-70. PMid:17944069
5. Qadeer S. The limitations of traditional non-digital occlusal indicators when compared to the t-scan computerized occlusal analysis technology. In: Medical Imaging: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Vol. 15. United States: IGI Global; 2017. p. 28-55. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0571-6.ch065