Comparison of the correlation of photoelasticity and digital imaging to characterize the load transfer of implant-supported restorations.

Autor: Tiossi R; Postdoctoral Research Associate, Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, University of São Paulo-Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil., de Torres EM; Assistant Professor, Department of Prevention and Oral Rehabilitation, Federal University of Goiás-School of Dentistry, Goiania, Brazil., Rodrigues RC; Assistant Professor, Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, University of São Paulo-Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil., Conrad HJ; Associate Professor, Department of Restorative Sciences, University of Minnesota-School of Dentistry, Minneapolis, Minn., de Mattos Mda G; Professor, Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, University of São Paulo-Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil., Fok AS; Professor and Director, Minnesota Dental Research Center for Biomaterials and Biomechanics, University of Minnesota-School of Dentistry, Minneapolis, Minn., Ribeiro RF; Professor, Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, University of São Paulo-Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: rribeiro@forp.usp.br.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: The Journal of prosthetic dentistry [J Prosthet Dent] 2014 Aug; Vol. 112 (2), pp. 276-84. Date of Electronic Publication: 2014 Jan 23.
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.09.029
Abstrakt: Statement of Problem: Whether splinting or not splinting adjacent implants together can optimize the stress/strain transfer to the supporting structures remains controversial.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the photoelasticity and digital image correlation (DIC) in analyzing the stresses/strains transferred by an implant-supported prosthesis.
Material and Methods: A polymethylmethacrylate model was made with a combination of acrylic resin replicas of a mandibular first premolar and second molar and threaded implants replacing the second premolar and first molar. Splinted (G1/G3) and nonsplinted (G2/G4) metal-ceramic screw-retained crowns were loaded with (G1/G2) and without (G3/G4) the presence of the second molar. Vertical static loads were applied to the first molar implant-supported crown (50 N-photoelasticity; 250 N-DIC). The resulting isochromatic fringes in the photoelastic models were photographed, and a single-camera 2-dimensional DIC system recorded the deformation at the surface of the resin models.
Results: Residual stresses were present in the photoelastic model after screw fixation of the crowns. The following average photoelastic stress results (MPa) were found around the loaded implant: G1 (20.06), G2 (23.49), G3 (30.86), G4 (37.64). Horizontal strains (εxx, %) between the molars averaged over the length of the loaded implant were found by DIC: G1 (0.08 ± 0.09), G2 (0.13 ± 0.10), G3 (0.13 ± 0.11), G4 (0.16 ± 0.11). Splinted crowns transferred lower stresses to the supporting bone when the second molar was absent. The second molar optimized the stress distribution between the supporting structures even for nonsplinted restorations.
Conclusions: Both methods presented similar results and seemed capable of indicating where issues associated with stress/strain concentrations might arise. However, DIC, while apparently less sensitive than photoelasticity, is not restricted to the use of light-polarizing materials.
(Copyright © 2014 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: