The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior and long-term safety of high performance polymer PEKK as an intraradicular dental post-core material through comparative finite element analysis (FEA) with other conventional post-core materials. A 3D FEA model of a maxillary central incisor was constructed. A cyclic loading force of 50 N was applied at an angle of 45° to the longitudinal axis of the tooth at the palatal surface of the crown. For comparison with traditionally used post-core materials, three materials (gold, fiberglass, and PEKK) were simulated to determine their post-core properties. PEKK, with a lower elastic modulus than root dentin, showed comparably high failure resistance and a more favorable stress distribution than conventional post-core material. However, the PEKK post-core system showed a higher probability of debonding and crown failure under long-term cyclic loading than the metal or fiberglass post-core systems.
Objective This study investigated the marginal and internal adaptation of individual dental crowns fabricated using a CAD/CAM system (Sirona’s BlueCam), also evaluating the effect of the software version used, and the specific parameter settings in the adaptation of crowns.Material and Methods Forty digital impressions of a master model previously prepared were acquired using an intraoral scanner and divided into four groups based on the software version and on the spacer settings used. The versions 3.8 and 4.2 of the software were used, and the spacer parameter was set at either 40 μm or 80 μm. The marginal and internal fit of the crowns were measured using the replica technique, which uses a low viscosity silicone material that simulates the thickness of the cement layer. The data were analyzed using a Friedman two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired t-tests with significance level set at p<0.05.Results The two-way ANOVA analysis showed the software version (p<0.05) and the spacer parameter (p<0.05) significantly affected the crown adaptation. The crowns designed with the version 4.2 of the software showed a better fit than those designed with the version 3.8, particularly in the axial wall and in the inner margin. The spacer parameter was more accurately represented in the version 4.2 of the software than in the version 3.8. In addition, the use of the version 4.2 of the software combined with the spacer parameter set at 80 μm showed the least variation. On the other hand, the outer margin was not affected by the variables.Conclusion Compared to the version 3.8 of the software, the version 4.2 can be recommended for the fabrication of well-fitting crown restorations, and for the appropriate regulation of the spacer parameter.
PURPOSEThe aim of this systematic review was to address treatment outcome according to attachment systems for mandibular implant overdentures in terms of implant survival rate, prosthetic maintenance and complications, and patient satisfaction.MATERIALS AND METHODSA systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed and hand searching of relevant journals considering inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical trial studies on mandibular implant overdentures until August, 2010 were selected if more than one type of overdenture attachment was reported. Twenty four studies from 1098 studies were finally included and the data on implant survival rate, prosthetic maintenance and complications, patient satisfaction were analyzed relative to attachment systems.RESULTSFour studies presented implant survival rates (95.8 - 97.5% for bar, 96.2 - 100% for ball, 91.7% for magnet) according to attachment system. Ten other studies presented an implant survival rate ranging from 93.3% to 100% without respect to the attachment groups. Common prosthetic maintenance and complications were replacement of an assay for magnet attachments, and activation of a matrix or clip for ball or bar attachments. Prosthetic maintenance and complications most commonly occurred in the magnet groups. Conflicting findings were found on the rate of prosthetic maintenance and complications comparing ball and bar attachments. Most studies showed no significant differences in patient satisfaction depending upon attachment systems.CONCLUSIONThe implant survival rate of mandibular overdentures seemed to be high regardless attachment systems. The prosthetic maintenance and complications may be influenced by attachment systems. However patient satisfaction may be independent of the attachment system.
PURPOSEThe object of the present study was to evaluate the shear bonding strength of composite to PEKK by applying several methods of surface treatment associated with various bonding materials.MATERIALS AND METHODSOne hundred and fifty PEKK specimens were assigned randomly to fifteen groups (n = 10) with the combination of three different surface treatments (95% sulfuric acid etching, airborne abrasion with 50 µm alumina, and airborne abrasion with 110 µm silica-coating alumina) and five different bonding materials (Luxatemp Glaze & Bond, Visio.link, All-Bond Universal, Single Bond Universal, and Monobond Plus with Heliobond). After surface treatment, surface roughness and contact angles were examined. Topography modifications after surface treatment were assessed with scanning electron microscopy. Resin composite was mounted on each specimen and then subjected to shear bond strength (SBS) test. SBS data were analyzed statistically using two-way ANOVA, and post-hoc Tukey's test (P<.05).RESULTSRegardless of bonding materials, mechanical surface treatment groups yielded significantly higher shear bonding strength values than chemical surface treatment groups. Unlike other adhesives, MDP and silane containing self-etching universal adhesive (Single Bond Universal) showed an effective shear bonding strength regardless of surface treatment method.CONCLUSIONMechanical surface treatment behaves better in terms of PEKK bonding. In addition, self-etching universal adhesive (Single Bond Universal) can be an alternative bonding material to PEKK irrespective of surface treatment method.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.