不同基托设计对种植体支持的固定局部义齿锚定在两种不同密度的聚氨酯模拟骨块中的抗折性的影响:体外研究。

Mohamed S Othman, Manal Rh Abu-Eittah
{"title":"不同基托设计对种植体支持的固定局部义齿锚定在两种不同密度的聚氨酯模拟骨块中的抗折性的影响:体外研究。","authors":"Mohamed S Othman, Manal Rh Abu-Eittah","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of implant-supported fixed partial prostheses fabricated from monolithic zirconia with different pontic framework designs and anchored in different bone-like simulation models of two different densities.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 60 implants were anchored in two different <i>in vitro</i> bone simulation models of two different densities, namely, solid polyurethane foam blocks, 20 and 10 pounds per cubic foot (PCF) to construct implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs), the pontic constructed to replace missing second premolar and first molar. Thirty models were constructed and then divided into two groups according to anchoring material D2 (<i>n</i> = 15) and D3 (<i>n</i> = 15). Each group of models was subdivided into three groups according to pontic design (<i>n</i> = 5). Each model was tested against fracture in a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed with a two-way univariate ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05). The results were statistically analyzed, and the values were considered significant at <i>p</i>≤0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings showed that neither change in pontic design nor change in bone type has a significant influence on the fracture resistance of the prostheses (<i>p</i> > 0.05). All the tested materials fell within the acceptable range for functioning under mastication, with a slight change in resistance when the pontic design was changed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Zirconia is considered the material of choice when planning implant-supported FPDs because of its high fracture strength values. Within the limitations of this study, the pontic design and synthetic polyurethane bone-simulating model had no effect on the fracture resistance of four-unit implant-supported FPDs.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>This study postulated that any pontic design could be used in four units of implant-supported FPDs according to functional and aesthetic needs, as long as the histological nature of the alveolar bone falls within the D2 or D3 bone type. How to cite this article: Othman MS, Abu-Eittah MRH. The Influence of Different Pontic Designs on Fracture Resistance of Implant-supported Fixed Partial Dentures Anchored in Polyurethane Simulating Bone-blocks of Two Different Densities: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):684-690.</p>","PeriodicalId":35792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"684-690"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Different Pontic Designs on Fracture Resistance of Implant-supported Fixed Partial Dentures Anchored in Polyurethane Simulating Bone-blocks of Two Different Densities: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study.\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed S Othman, Manal Rh Abu-Eittah\",\"doi\":\"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3721\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of implant-supported fixed partial prostheses fabricated from monolithic zirconia with different pontic framework designs and anchored in different bone-like simulation models of two different densities.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 60 implants were anchored in two different <i>in vitro</i> bone simulation models of two different densities, namely, solid polyurethane foam blocks, 20 and 10 pounds per cubic foot (PCF) to construct implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs), the pontic constructed to replace missing second premolar and first molar. Thirty models were constructed and then divided into two groups according to anchoring material D2 (<i>n</i> = 15) and D3 (<i>n</i> = 15). Each group of models was subdivided into three groups according to pontic design (<i>n</i> = 5). Each model was tested against fracture in a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed with a two-way univariate ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05). The results were statistically analyzed, and the values were considered significant at <i>p</i>≤0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings showed that neither change in pontic design nor change in bone type has a significant influence on the fracture resistance of the prostheses (<i>p</i> > 0.05). All the tested materials fell within the acceptable range for functioning under mastication, with a slight change in resistance when the pontic design was changed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Zirconia is considered the material of choice when planning implant-supported FPDs because of its high fracture strength values. Within the limitations of this study, the pontic design and synthetic polyurethane bone-simulating model had no effect on the fracture resistance of four-unit implant-supported FPDs.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>This study postulated that any pontic design could be used in four units of implant-supported FPDs according to functional and aesthetic needs, as long as the histological nature of the alveolar bone falls within the D2 or D3 bone type. How to cite this article: Othman MS, Abu-Eittah MRH. The Influence of Different Pontic Designs on Fracture Resistance of Implant-supported Fixed Partial Dentures Anchored in Polyurethane Simulating Bone-blocks of Two Different Densities: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):684-690.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35792,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice\",\"volume\":\"25 7\",\"pages\":\"684-690\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3721\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3721","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估种植体支持的固定部分修复体的抗骨折性,该修复体由具有不同桩骨框架设计的整体氧化锆制成,并锚定在两种不同密度的类骨模拟模型中:共将 60 个种植体锚定在两种不同密度的体外骨模拟模型中,即每立方英尺 20 磅和 10 磅(PCF)的固体聚氨酯泡沫块,以构建种植体支持的固定局部义齿(FPD),构建的基台用于替代缺失的第二前磨牙和第一磨牙。共制作了 30 个模型,然后根据锚定材料 D2(n = 15)和 D3(n = 15)分为两组。每组模型又根据桩体设计分为三组(n = 5)。每个模型都在万能试验机上进行了断裂测试。数据分析采用双向单变量方差分析和 Tukey HSD 检验(α = 0.05)。结果经统计学分析,以 p≤0.05 为显著:结果表明,桩体设计的改变和骨类型的改变对修复体的抗折性都没有显著影响(p > 0.05)。所有受测材料在咀嚼时的功能都在可接受的范围内,当改变桥体设计时,抗折性略有变化:结论:氧化锆因其较高的断裂强度值而被认为是规划种植体支持FPD时的首选材料。在本研究的限制条件下,基台设计和合成聚氨酯骨模拟模型对四单位种植体支持的 FPD 的抗折强度没有影响:本研究推测,只要牙槽骨的组织学性质属于 D2 或 D3 骨类型,任何基台设计都可以根据功能和美学需要用于四单位种植体支持的 FPD。本文引用方式Othman MS, Abu-Eittah MRH.不同基托设计对种植体支持的固定局部义齿锚定在两种不同密度的聚氨酯模拟骨块中的抗折性的影响:体外研究。J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):684-690.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Influence of Different Pontic Designs on Fracture Resistance of Implant-supported Fixed Partial Dentures Anchored in Polyurethane Simulating Bone-blocks of Two Different Densities: An In Vitro Study.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of implant-supported fixed partial prostheses fabricated from monolithic zirconia with different pontic framework designs and anchored in different bone-like simulation models of two different densities.

Materials and methods: A total of 60 implants were anchored in two different in vitro bone simulation models of two different densities, namely, solid polyurethane foam blocks, 20 and 10 pounds per cubic foot (PCF) to construct implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs), the pontic constructed to replace missing second premolar and first molar. Thirty models were constructed and then divided into two groups according to anchoring material D2 (n = 15) and D3 (n = 15). Each group of models was subdivided into three groups according to pontic design (n = 5). Each model was tested against fracture in a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed with a two-way univariate ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05). The results were statistically analyzed, and the values were considered significant at p≤0.05.

Results: The findings showed that neither change in pontic design nor change in bone type has a significant influence on the fracture resistance of the prostheses (p > 0.05). All the tested materials fell within the acceptable range for functioning under mastication, with a slight change in resistance when the pontic design was changed.

Conclusion: Zirconia is considered the material of choice when planning implant-supported FPDs because of its high fracture strength values. Within the limitations of this study, the pontic design and synthetic polyurethane bone-simulating model had no effect on the fracture resistance of four-unit implant-supported FPDs.

Clinical significance: This study postulated that any pontic design could be used in four units of implant-supported FPDs according to functional and aesthetic needs, as long as the histological nature of the alveolar bone falls within the D2 or D3 bone type. How to cite this article: Othman MS, Abu-Eittah MRH. The Influence of Different Pontic Designs on Fracture Resistance of Implant-supported Fixed Partial Dentures Anchored in Polyurethane Simulating Bone-blocks of Two Different Densities: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):684-690.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice (JCDP), is a peer-reviewed, open access MEDLINE indexed journal. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.thejcdp.com. The journal allows free access (open access) to its contents. Articles with clinical relevance will be given preference for publication. The Journal publishes original research papers, review articles, rare and novel case reports, and clinical techniques. Manuscripts are invited from all specialties of dentistry i.e., conservative dentistry and endodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthodontics, oral medicine and radiology, oral pathology, oral surgery, orodental diseases, pediatric dentistry, implantology, periodontics, clinical aspects of public health dentistry, and prosthodontics.
期刊最新文献
Internal Fit and Marginal Adaptation of Posterior CAD/CAM Crowns Fabricated from Fully Crystallized Lithium Disilicate Compared to Partially Crystallized Lithium Disilicate with Two Finish Line Thicknesses: An In Vitro Study. Management of Deep Caries Lesions: A Study among Dentists in the Private Sector of Casablanca, Morocco. One-year Clinical Evaluation, Patient Satisfaction, and Adaptation of Milled (PEEK) Single Anterior Crowns Veneered with Two Different Techniques. Patient Satisfaction during Upper Lip Augmentation Procedures: V-Y in V-Y Technique Compared to Micro-fat Injection: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Trends, Collaborative Networks, and Impact of Infrared Thermography and Thermal Therapies in Dentistry: A Bibliometric Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1