Publicação:
Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers

dc.contributor.authorTribst, Joaõ Paulo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDal Piva, Amanda [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDe Lima, Dimas [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBorges, Alexandre [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBottino, Marco [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T17:21:52Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T17:21:52Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: Mechanical scaling is the most common treatment of periodontal and peri-implant tissue infections. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of mechanical prophylactic therapy on the residual stresses in the implant and hand scaler. Settings and Design: For finite-element analysis, an implant-supported prosthesis was created using modeling software with 3 mm of exposed threads. For simulation of a prophylactic mechanical debridement, the active face of the shank was disposed of in contact with the last thread exposed at a 90° angle. Materials and Methods: In the analysis software, the contacts were defined as rough between the instrument and the implant. The cortical bone was fixed and a load of 10 N was applied to the instrument cable. Two simulations were performed according to the instrument material: Stainless steel or Teflon. Von-Mises results were obtained. Statistical Analysis Used: No statistical test was used, but, the 500 higher stress peaks in the implant and in the instrument were analyzed for qualitative comparison. Results: Mechanical prophylactic therapy generates higher residual stress on the implant with a stainless steel instrument. There was no difference between the materials for the active tip of the instrument, and the active portion of the shank was the region which concentrated more stress. Conclusions: It is suggested that hand scalers in Teflon are less damaging to the implant, but more susceptible to deformation and possible early failures.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp) Institute of Science and Technology Saõ José Dos Campos, 777 Avenida Eng
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp) Institute of Science and Technology Saõ José Dos Campos, 777 Avenida Eng
dc.format.extent340-344
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_201_18
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology, v. 22, n. 4, p. 340-344, 2018.
dc.identifier.doi10.4103/jisp.jisp_201_18
dc.identifier.file2-s2.0-85050526726.pdf
dc.identifier.issn0975-1580
dc.identifier.issn0972-124X
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85050526726
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/176640
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectCleaning instruments
dc.subjectdental/oral implants
dc.subjecthand instruments
dc.subjectimplant surfaces
dc.subjectperi-implantitis
dc.titleSimulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalersen
dc.typeArtigo
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia, São José dos Campospt
unesp.departmentMateriais Odontológicos e Prótese - ICTpt

Arquivos

Pacote Original

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
2-s2.0-85050526726.pdf
Tamanho:
756.06 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição: