Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of artificial aging on the fracture behavior of straight and angulated zirconia implant abutments (ZirDesign™; Astra Tech, Mölndal, Sweden) supporting anterior single crowns (SCs). Four different test groups (n = 8) representing anterior SCs were prepared. Groups 1 and 2 simulated a clinical situation with an ideal implant position (left central incisor) from a prosthetic point of view, which allows for the use of a straight, prefabricated zirconia abutment. Groups 3 and 4 simulated a situation with a compromised implant position, requiring an angulated (20°) abutment. OsseoSpeed™ implants (Astra Tech) 4.5 mm in diameter and 13 mm in length were used to support the abutments. The SCs (chromium cobalt alloy) were cemented with glass ionomer cement. Groups 2 and 4 were thermomechanically loaded (TCML = 1.2 × 10⁶; 10,000 × 5°/55°) and subjected to static loading until failure. Statistical analysis of force data at the fracture site was performed using nonparametric tests. All samples tested survived TCML. Artificial aging did not lead to a significant decrease in load-bearing capacity in either the groups with straight abutments or the groups with angulated abutments. The restorations that utilized angulated abutments exhibited higher fracture loads than the restorations with straight abutments (group 1, 280.25 ± 30.45 N; group 2, 268.88 ± 38.00 N; group 3, 355.00 ± 24.71 N; group 4, 320.71 ± 78.08 N). This difference in load-bearing performance between straight and angulated abutments was statistically significant (p = 0.000) only when no artificial aging was employed. The vast majority of the abutments fractured below the implant shoulder.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0377-y | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!