Submitted by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2017-06-30T17:56:18Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
DIS_ROBERTA_ALENCASTRO_AVILA_PARCIAL.pdf: 118749 bytes, checksum: dc5aeca744ebbdf64a56379812249ac5 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2017-06-30T17:56:27Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
DIS_ROBERTA_ALENCASTRO_AVILA_PARCIAL.pdf: 118749 bytes, checksum: dc5aeca744ebbdf64a56379812249ac5 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-30T17:56:37Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
DIS_ROBERTA_ALENCASTRO_AVILA_PARCIAL.pdf: 118749 bytes, checksum: dc5aeca744ebbdf64a56379812249ac5 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2017-01-20 / Introduction: The objective of this work was through a prospective cohort analysis evaluate possible correlations between periimplantar bone loss of lower fixed implants (PTFIs) and their respective distribution of bilateral occlusal contacts, maximum bite force (FMM), area occlusal contacts of left and right lateral movements, their relation with the antagonist arch and the presence or absence of provisional fixed prosthesis. Materials and Methods: This convenience sample consisted of 20 (twenty) patients with lower PTFIs who were followed for one year, after the installation of the prosthesis. In the two data collections the FMM measurement was performed, the occlusal contacts distribution was measured through the T-Scan III device and a Cone Beam computed tomography was ordered to evaluate the periimplant bone loss. For the measurement of bone loss, a comparison was made between the initial and second moments. After this process the results of periimplant bone loss were correlated and compared with the other data obtained. The statistical analysis performed to evaluate bone loss of implants was the Friedman test and Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney comparisons test, the Spearman correlations test and Student's T-test. Results: The main results were: 1) the implants do not differentiate in relation to periimplant bone loss; 2) there was no significant correlation of bone loss with FMM, right and left laterality and the distribution of contacts in maximum intercuspal position; 3) in comparison between bone loss of patients with full dentures and partially edentulous, they showed no statistically significant difference, as well as in patients who received provisional full prosthesis and those who did not receive. Conclusion: Bone loss appears to occur similarly between all implants, sides, and regions. FMM, R and L laterality, MIH contact distribution, and the antagonist arcade do not appear to interfere with periimplant bone remodeling. The preliminary results of this study suggest that there is no need for provisioning in inferior restorations, since there were no differences in bone loss between patients who received and did not receive fixed provisional. / Introdu??o: O objetivo deste trabalho foi atrav?s de uma an?lise tipo coorte prospectivo, avaliar as poss?veis rela??es existentes entre a perda ?ssea periimplantar de pr?teses totais fixas implantossuportadas inferiores (PTFIs) e sua respectiva distribui??o de contatos oclusais bilaterias, for?a m?xima de mordida (FMM), ?rea de contatos oclusais nos movimentos de lateralidade esquerda e direita, sua rela??o com arcada antagonista e presen?a ou n?o de pr?tese fixa provis?ria. Materiais e M?todos: A amostra de conveni?ncia foi constitu?da por 20 pacientes portadores PTFIs inferiores, e foram acompanhados por um per?odo de um ano, ap?s a instala??o da pr?tese. Nas duas coletas de dados foi realizada a medi??o da FMM, medi??o da distribui??o dos contatos oclusais atrav?s do aparelho T-Scan III e solicitado uma tomografia computadorizada Cone Beam para avalia??o da perda ?ssea periimplantar. Para mensura??o da perda ?ssea, foi realizada a compara??o entre as tomadas iniciais e no segundo momento. Ap?s, os resultados de perda ?ssea periimplantar foram correlacionados e comparados com os demais dados obtidos. A an?lise estat?stica realizada para avaliar perda ?ssea dos implantes, lados e regi?es foi o teste de Friedman e teste de Wilcoxon, para compara??es teste de Mann-Whitney e para as correla??es teste de Spearman e teste T de Student. Resultados: Os principais resultados foram: 1) os implantes n?o se diferenciam em rela??o a perda ?ssea periimplantar; 2) n?o houve correla??o significativa de perda ?ssea com FMM, lateralidade D e E e a distribui??o de contatos em MIH; 3) na compara??o entre perda ?ssea de pacientes com antagonista PT e parcialmente ed?ntulos, n?o mostrou diferen?a estatisticamente significativa, assim como em pacientes que receberam protocolo provis?rio e os que n?o receberam. Conclus?o: A perda ?ssea parece ocorrer de forma semelhante entre todos os implantes, lados e regi?es. A FMM, a lateralidade D e E, a distribui??o de contatos em MIH e a arcada antagonista n?o parecem interferir na remodela??o ?ssea periimplantar. Os resultados preliminares deste estudo sugerem que n?o h? necessidade de provisionaliza??o em protocolos inferiores, visto que n?o houve diferen?as de perda ?ssea entre os pacientes que receberam e n?o receberam provis?rio fixo.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/7493 |
| Date | 20 January 2017 |
| Creators | ?vila, Roberta Alencastro |
| Contributors | Teixeira, Eduardo Rolim |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Odontologia, PUCRS, Brasil, Faculdade de Odontologia |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | -7411869720500764667, 600, 600, 600, 4673435736271820140, -2070498469879244349 |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds