Efficacy of sealing agents on preload maintenance of screw-retained implant-supported prostheses

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível

Data

2018-01-01

Autores

Seloto, Camila Berbel [UNESP]
Sahyon, Henrico Badaoui Strazzi [UNESP]
dos Santos, Paulo Henrique [UNESP]
Delben, Juliana Aparecida
Assunção, Wirley Gonçalves [UNESP]

Título da Revista

ISSN da Revista

Título de Volume

Editor

Resumo

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of sealing agents on preload maintenance of screw joints. Materials and Methods: A total of four groups (n = 10 in each group) of abutment/implant systems, including external hexagon implants and antirotational UCLA abutments with a metallic collar in cobalt-chromium alloy, were assessed. In the control group (CG), no sealing agent was used at the abutment screw/implant interface. In the other groups, three different sealing agents were used at the abutment screw/implant interface: anaerobic sealing agent for medium torque (ASMT), anaerobic sealing agent for high torque (ASHT), and cyanoacrylate-based bonding agent (CYAB). All abutments were attached to the implants at 32 ± 1 N.cm. After 48 ± 2 hours of initial tightening, loosing torque (detorque) was measured using a digital torque wrench. Data were analyzed using Shapiro-Wilk, Wilcoxon, and Kruskal-Wallis tests, at 5% level of significance. Results: In the CG and ASMT groups, detorque was lower than the insertion torque (24.6 ± 1.5 N.cm and 24.3 ± 1.1 N.cm, respectively). In the ASHT and CYAB groups, mean detorque increased in comparison to the insertion torque (51.0 ± 7.4 N.cm and 47.7 ± 15.1 N.cm, respectively). Conclusion: The ASHT was more efficient than the other sealing agents, increasing the remaining preload (detorque value) 58.88%. Although the cyanoacrylate-based bonding agent also generated high detorque values, the high standard deviation suggested its lower reliability.

Descrição

Palavras-chave

Detorque, Implant-supported restorations, Preload, Screw joint

Como citar

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 33, n. 1, p. 123-126, 2018.