Logo do repositório
 

Stress distribution in implant-supported prostheses using different connection systems and cantilever lengths: Digital photoelasticity

dc.contributor.authorGoiato, Marcelo Coelho [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorShibayama, Ricardo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFilho, Humberto Gennari [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDe Medeiros, Rodrigo Antonio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorPesqueira, Aldiéris Alves [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDos Santos, Daniela Micheline [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDe Araújo, Cleudmar Amaral
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T17:00:32Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T17:00:32Z
dc.date.issued2016-02-17
dc.description.abstractPhotoelastic analysis was used to evaluate the biomechanical behaviour of implant-supported, double-screwed crowns with different connection systems and cantilever lengths. Three models were made in PL-2 photoelastic resin and divided into six groups, on the basis of the implant connection system (external hexagon [EH] or Morse taper [MT]), type of abutment (Mini Pilar [Neodent, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil] or UCLA) and number of crowns in the cantilever (one or two). The implant-prosthesis unit was placed in a circular polariscope. Occlusal surfaces of the crowns were subjected to 100-N loads in the axial and oblique (45°) directions in a universal testing machine (EMIC). Generated stresses were recorded and analysed qualitatively in a graphics program (Adobe Photoshop). Under axial loading, all of the groups had similar numbers of fringes, which were increased when the crowns were subjected to oblique loading. The highest number of fringes was found during oblique loading in the EH + Mini Pilar group. In conclusion, although the type of implant connection system did not have a direct influence on the stress distribution for axial loading, the cantilever length did have a direct influence on stress distribution. Models with two crowns in the cantilever showed more stress, with a greater concentration of force on the cervical part of the implant.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Aracątuba Dental School UNESP
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Mechanical Projects Federal University of Uberlândia
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Aracątuba Dental School UNESP
dc.format.extent35-42
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03091902.2015.1127440
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Medical Engineering and Technology, v. 40, n. 2, p. 35-42, 2016.
dc.identifier.doi10.3109/03091902.2015.1127440
dc.identifier.issn1464-522X
dc.identifier.issn0309-1902
dc.identifier.lattes9719883814872582
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84955676625
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/172471
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Medical Engineering and Technology
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,389
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso abertopt
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectbiomechanics
dc.subjectdental implant
dc.subjectDigital photoelasticity
dc.subjectimage analysis
dc.titleStress distribution in implant-supported prostheses using different connection systems and cantilever lengths: Digital photoelasticityen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isDepartmentOfPublication5f53b343-da2a-4737-96ec-6e2389a6d704
relation.isDepartmentOfPublication.latestForDiscovery5f53b343-da2a-4737-96ec-6e2389a6d704
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication8b3335a4-1163-438a-a0e2-921a46e0380d
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery8b3335a4-1163-438a-a0e2-921a46e0380d
unesp.author.lattes2336450644149867[5]
unesp.author.lattes9719883814872582
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-3020-5253[5]
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araçatubapt
unesp.departmentMateriais odontológicos e Prótese - FOApt

Arquivos