Comparative study of two precision overdenture attachment designs

Cohen, Beverly S.; Pagnillo, Mark K.; Condos, Spyridon; Deutsch, Allan S.

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(96)90298-x

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, significant differences between the two groups were found regarding initial retention. Differences were near to 50 N and comparable to those found by other studies, which evaluated different stud attachment systems (11–17, 20, 22, 23, 25, 29). It was expected that the tested systems would present distinct mean retention forces at baseline, as long as both present different retentive mechanisms.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures

Nader

Souza

Fortin

et al. 2010

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assessed the effect of simulated mastication on the retention of two stud attachment systems for 2-implants overdentures. Sixteen specimens, each simulating an edentulous ridge with implants and an overdenture were divided into two groups, according to the attachment system: Group I (Nobel Biocare ball-socket attachments) and Group II (Locator attachments). Retention forces were measured before and after 400,000 simulated masticatory loads in a customised device. Data were compared by two-way anova followed by Bonferroni test (α = 0·05). Group I presented significantly lower retention forces (Newtons) than Group II at baseline (10·6 ± 3·6 and 66·4 ± 16·0, respectively). However, differences were not significant after 400,000 loads (7·9 ± 4·3 and 21·6 ± 17·0). The number of cycles did not influence the measurements in Group I, whereas a non-linear descending curve was found for Group II. It was concluded that simulated mastication resulted in minor changes for the ball attachment tested. Nevertheless, it reduced the retention of Locator attachments to 40% of the baseline values, what suggests that mastication is a major factor associated with maintenance needs for this system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Ball‐socket attachments tend to exhibit gradual and continuous loss of retention associated with repeated insertion‐removal cycles (11–19). This loss is usually abrupt after approximately 500 cycles, depending on the morphological characteristics of the system, and can reach 80% from the initial values after 2000 cycles (12, 20).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures

Nader

Souza

Fortin

et al. 2010

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fatigue and tensile strength tests were performed using a universal testing machine (Material Testing System – MTS 810) † . Component insertion and removal movements were performed along the implant's long axis (8, 9).…”

Section: Retention Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems

Botega

Mesquita

Henriques

et al. 2004

J of Oral Rehabilitation

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated retention force and fatigue resistance of two overdenture attachment systems. Twenty samples (O-ring and Bar-Clip) from two manufacturers (Conexão Sistemas de Prótese and Lifecore Biomedical) were prepared and divided into four groups: (i) Conexão/O-ring; (ii) Conexão/Bar-Clip; (iii) Lifecore/O-ring and (iv) Lifecore/Bar-Clip, with five samples in each group. They were submitted to mechanical fatigue test using a servohydraulic machine performing 5500 cycles of insertion and removal (f=0.8 Hz), immersed in artificial saliva. Retention force values were obtained three times (0, 3000 and after 5500 cycles) simulating the clinical service, using a tensile strength at 1 mm min(-1) and load cell of 1 kN. Data were analysed with analysis of variance and Tukey's test at 5% level. Results showed that Conexão/Bar-Clip specimens had significantly higher retention values than Lifecore/Bar-Clip (44.61 and 18.44 N, respectively), Conexão/O-ring specimens had significantly lower values than Lifecore/O-ring (13.91 and 19.75 N, respectively). Conexão/Bar-Clip values were always significantly higher than those of Conexão/O-ring group (44.61 and 13.91 N, respectively). Lifecore (O-ring and Bar-Clip) presented similar values (19.75 and 18.44 N, respectively). The systems evaluated showed satisfactory retention force values, before and after fatigue testing. Conexão/Bar-Clip specimens presented the highest values. A 5-year simulation of insertion and removal did not decrease retention values or fracture components.

show abstract

“…Maximum dislodging forces or peak loads, defined as the maximum forces developed before complete separation of attachment components from teeth or implant abutments, can be used as proxy measurement of overdentures retention (27). It has been shown that the maximum force necessary to dislodge implant overdentures from their abutments varies with the number of insertion/removal cycles (15–23). Some studies evaluated the peak load forces of individual attachments while others measured the maximum dislodging forces of the entire overdenture (15–29).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the retention of attachments for implant overdentures – validation of an original force measurement system

Fromentin

Lassauzay

Nader

et al. 2009

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to validate an original portable device to measure attachment retention of implant overdentures both in the lab and in clinical settings. The device was built with a digital force measurement gauge (Imada) secured to a vertical wheel stand associated with a customized support to hold and position the denture in adjustable angulations. Sixteen matrix and patrix cylindrical stud attachments (Locator) were randomly assigned as in vitro test specimens. Attachment abutments were secured in an implant analogue hung to the digital force gauge or to the load cell of a traction machine used as the gold standard (Instron Universal Testing Machine). Matrices were secured in a denture duplicate attached to the customized support, permitting reproducibility of their position on both pulling devices. Attachment retention in the axial direction was evaluated by measuring maximum dislodging force or peak load during five consecutive linear dislodgments of each attachment on both devices. After a wear simulation, retention was measured again at several time periods. The peak load measurements with the customized Imada device were similar to those obtained with the gold standard Instron machine. These findings suggest that the proposed portable device can provide accurate information on the retentive properties of attachment systems for removable dental prostheses.

show abstract

Comparative study of two precision overdenture attachment designs

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures

Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures

Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems

Testing the retention of attachments for implant overdentures – validation of an original force measurement system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About