Logo do repositório

Monolithic zirconia crown does not increase the peri-implant strain under axial load

dc.contributor.authorTribst, Joao Paulo Mendes [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorOliveira Dal Piva, Amanda Maria De [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRiquieri, Hilton [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorNishioka, Renato Sussumu [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBottino, Marco Antonio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRodrigues, Vinicius Aneas
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionFac Pindamonhangaba FUNVIC
dc.contributor.institutionFree Univ Amsterdam
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-26T08:03:19Z
dc.date.available2021-06-26T08:03:19Z
dc.date.issued2019-01-01
dc.description.abstractAims: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of the crown type on the cervical microstrain around an external hexagon implant. Subjects and Methods: A dental manikin was impressed with addition-polymerizing silicone, and a hemiarch model was obtained with polyurethane resin. Then, a 3.75 mm x 11 mm implant was installed with 40 N/cm of torque in the region of element 36. Two groups were separated according to the type of crown used for rehabilitation: metal-ceramic crown (n = 10) or monolithic zirconia crown (n = 10). All crowns presented similar anatomy, with contact point in elements 35 and 37. Then, the polyurethane model was cleaned with isopropyl alcohol, and four strain gauges were bonded with cyanoacrylate adhesive in different areas (bucccal, lingual, mesial, and distal) around the implant. The crowns were installed with 20 N/cm torque, and an axial load (30 kgf) was applied in the center of the crown. Statistical Analysis: After performing 10 readings in each specimen, the data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test, all with alpha = 5%. Results: The results showed no statistical difference for the microstrain between the analyzed crowns (P = 0.065), and the microstrain values were different according to the area (P = 0.002): buccal (1514.9 +/- 233.8) > lingual (1280.8 +/- 245.5) > distal (373.2 +/- 105.2) > mesial (216.7 +/- 111.4). Conclusions: The crown type did not modify the microstrain in the peri-implant tissue.en
dc.description.affiliationSao Paulo State Univ, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, Sao Jose, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationFac Pindamonhangaba FUNVIC, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, Pindamonhangaba, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationFree Univ Amsterdam, Acad Ctr Dent Amsterdam, Dept Dent Mat Sci, Gustav Mahlerlaan 3004, NL-1081 LA Amsterdam, Netherlands
dc.description.affiliationUnespSao Paulo State Univ, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, Sao Jose, Brazil
dc.format.extent50-53
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jioh.jioh_307_18
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of International Oral Health. Mumbai: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, v. 11, n. 1, p. 50-53, 2019.
dc.identifier.doi10.4103/jioh.jioh_307_18
dc.identifier.issn0976-7428
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/210802
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000656803300010
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of International Oral Health
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectDental implants
dc.subjectprosthetic dentistry
dc.subjectstrain gauge
dc.titleMonolithic zirconia crown does not increase the peri-implant strain under axial loaden
dc.typeArtigo
dcterms.rightsHolderWolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia, São José dos Campospt
unesp.departmentMateriais Odontológicos e Prótese - ICTpt

Arquivos