The aim of this study was to evaluate the stress distribution of different retention systems (screwed, cemented, and mixed) in 5-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures through the photoelasticity method. Twenty standardized titanium suprastructures were manufactured, of which 5 were screw retained, 5 were cement retained, and 10 were mixed (with an alternating sequence of abutments), each supported by 5 external hexagon (4.0 mm × 11.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Oral Maxillofac Implants
February 2014
Purpose: To verify the effectiveness of a countertorque device in dental implants in redistributing stress to the bone-implant interface during tightening of the abutment screw.
Materials And Methods: Two prismatic photoelastic samples containing implants were made, one with a 3.75-mm-diameter implant and the other with a 5.
One of the causes of implant failures in cemented implant-retained prostheses is the fracture of abutment screw or UCLA abutment. This article reports a case of simultaneous fracture of two UCLA abutments screws occurring in an implant-supported prosthesis placed in the mandibular molar region. The fractured structures were examined under scanning electron microscopy to investigate the probable causes of the failure, which were not related to failures on materials or fabrication of the screws, but rather were due to shear forces.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: The objective of this work was to compare by photoelastic analysis the stress distribution along a fixed framework placed over angled or parallel implants with different gap values between the framework and one of the implants.
Materials And Methods: Two photoelastic models were created: (i) with parallel implants; (ii) with a 30 degrees angled central implant. In both cases, three implants were used, and CP titanium frameworks were constructed with commercial components.
The longevity of implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation depends largely on how the masticatory forces are transferred to the implants and surrounding bone. Anatomical conditions, bone morphology and aesthetics usually dictate implant placement in less than ideal positions for prosthetic rehabilitation and sometimes it is possible to find them with different inclinations. The purpose of this paper was to compare, through photoelastic analysis, the stress distribution in a fixed prosthesis with 3 parallel implants, to the stress distribution in the same prosthesis in the existence of an angled central implant.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF