Submitted by Cássia Santos (cassia.bcufg@gmail.com) on 2014-09-02T11:26:28Z
No. of bitstreams: 2
license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5)
Dissertação Joao Francisco Machado do Nascimento.pdf: 721039 bytes, checksum: 2a145e907cf0cfc7e15f26459ae30aff (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2014-09-02T11:26:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2
license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5)
Dissertação Joao Francisco Machado do Nascimento.pdf: 721039 bytes, checksum: 2a145e907cf0cfc7e15f26459ae30aff (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2013-08-14 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico - CNPq / For patients poorly adapted to conventional dentures, the single-implant
mandibular overdenture has been proposed as a simplified alternative for the
two-implant treatment, together with the use of immediate loading of the implant.
The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the photoelastic characteristics of
stress transfer to the implant in a single-implant mandibular overdenture using
different types of attachments. A photoelastic model of an edentulous mandible
with a resilient edentulous ridge and a unique implant located at the symphyseal
region was obtained to reproduce a single implant-retained mandibular
overdenture. Six 2.0 mm height attachments were selected and inserted in the
same photoelastic model in a random order. A universal material testing machine
was used to induce axial vertical loads of 70 N applied in the central incisor and
in the central region of the first right molar without contact on the contralateral
side. The photoelastic analysis was performed using a polariscope integrated into
the testing machine. Standard separate views were photographed and evaluated
visually for stress-induced fringes, to comparatively rank the different attachment
systems. All attachments showed a similar tension distribution concentrated in
the apical third, and the highest stress concentration at the apical level. There
was a low stress concentration at the coronal third of the implant, with no
discernible stress in the first threads of the implants, except for Dalla Bona which
showed low stress at the coronal part of the implant (one fringe). No identifiable
fringes were observed when the load was applied in the molar region, which
resulted from the low amount of stress transmitted by the implant for all
attachments. It was concluded that the load transferred to a single mandibular
implant is low and within the limits of functional loading, irrespective of the type of
retention system. / Implantes osseointegrados vêm sendo utilizados com sucesso para restaurar a
função e a estética de pacientes desdentados totais e parciais. No entanto há
necessidade de tornar o tratamento de pessoas com necessidade de
overdenture retida com implante menos oneroso e mais eficiente. O objetivo
deste trabalho foi verificar pela técnica fotoelástica (Qualitativa) as tensões
geradas ao redor do implante pela aplicação de carga sobre overdenture
mandibular retida por um implante unitário na sínfise da mandibular. Foi
confeccionado um modelo de resina fotoelástica Araldite, reproduzido de uma
mandibular anatômica, onde foi fixado na região sínfise um implante
3.75x11mm (Titamax Ti Cortical, Neodent, Curitiba, Brasil). Com um modelo foi
confeccionada uma prótese total e gingival artificial. Todos os pilares foram
posicionados sobre o implante e apertado com 10 Ncm, a fêmea foi capturada
de forma direta à prótese, com a réplica da mucosa em posição. Todos foram
sucessivamente capturados e levados ‘à máquina de ensaio universal. Com
uma carga axial de 70 Ncm na fossa central do 46 e incisal do 41. Foram
fotografados em um polariscópio as franjas resultantes das tensões. Foram
feitas análises qualitativa dos resultados das tensões sobre o attachment. De
acordo com os resultados obtidos pode-se concluir que a carga transferida para
o implante, é baixo, independente do sistema de retenção.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:repositorio.bc.ufg.br:tde/2980 |
| Date | 14 August 2013 |
| Creators | Nascimento, João Francisco Machado do |
| Contributors | Leles, Cláudio Rodrigues |
| Publisher | Universidade Federal de Goiás, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências da Saúde (FM), UFG, Brasil, Faculdade de Medicina - FM (RG) |
| 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 UFG, instname:Universidade Federal de Goiás, instacron:UFG |
| Rights | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/, info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | -1006864312617745310, 600, 600, 600, 600, 1545772475950486338, -2070498469879244349, -2555911436985713659, Alsabeeha N, Atieh M, Swain MV, Payne AG. Attachment systems for mandibular single-implant overdentures: an in vitro retention force investigation on different designs. Int J Prosthodont. 2010 Mar-Apr;23(2):160-6. Alsabeeha NH, Payne AG, De Silva RK, Thomson WM. Mandibular single-implant overdentures: preliminary results of a randomised-control trial on early loading with different implant diameters and attachment systems. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Mar;22(3):330-7. Alsabeeha NHM, Swain MV, Payne AGT. Clinical performance and material properties of single-implant overdenture attachment systems. International Journal of Prosthodontics 2011;24:247–54. Brasil, Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Atenção à Saúde, Departamento de Atenção Básica (BR).Projeto SBBrasil 2010: Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde Bucal: resultados principais. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde, 2011. 92 p. Carlsson G, Kronstrom M, de Baat C, Cune M, Davis D, Garefis P, Heo SJ, Jokstad A, Matsuura M, Narhi T, Ow R, Pissiotis A, Sato H & Zarb G. A survey of the use of mandibular implant overdentures in 10 countries. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17: 211-7. Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010 Feb;37(2):143-56. Cheng T, Sun G, Huo J, He X, Wang Y, Ren YF. Patient satisfaction and masticatory efficiency of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures using the stud and magnetic attachments. J Dent 2012 Nov;40(11):1018-23. Cordioli G, Majzoub Z, Castagna S. Mandibular overdentures anchored to single implants: A five-year prospective study. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:159-65. Critchlow SB, Ellis JS. Prognostic indicators for conventional complete denture therapy: a review of the literature. J Dent. 2010 Jan;38(1):2-9. Dudic A, Mericske-Stern R. Retention mechanisms and prosthetic complications of implant-supported mandibular overdentures: Long-term results. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;4:212-9. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, Head T, Lund JP, MacEntee M, Mericske-Stern R, Mojon P, Morais J, Naert I, Payne AG, Penrod J, Stoker GT Jr, Tawse-Smith A, Taylor TD, Thomason JM, Thomson WM, Wismeijer D. The McGill Consensus Statement on Overdentures. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. May 24-25, 2002. Int J Prosthodont. 2002 Jul-Aug;15(4):413-4. Fiske J, Davis DM, Frances C, Gelbier S. The emotional effects of tooth loss in edentulous people. British Dental Journal 1998;184:90-3. Fitzpatrick B. Standard of care for the edentulous mandible: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2006 Jan;95(1):71-8. Freeman C, Brook I, Joshi R. Long-term follow-up of implantstabilised overdentures. Eur J Prosthodont Restorative Dent 2001;9:147-50. Gonda T, Maeda Y, Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Fracture incidence in mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103:178-81. Gotfredsen K, Holm B. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with ball or bar attachments: A randomized prospective 5-year study. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:125-30. Grover M, Vaidyanathan AK, Veeravalli PT. OHRQoL, masticatory performance and crestal bone loss with single-implant, magnet-retained mandibular overdentures with conventional and shortened dental arch. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013 Jan 21. doi: 10.1111/clr.12111. [Epub ahead of print] Harder S, Wolfart S, Egert C, Kern M. Three-year clinical outcome of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures--results of preliminary prospective study. J Dent. 2011 Oct;39(10):656-61. Hugo FN, Hilgert JB, de Sousa Mda L, da Silva DD, Pucca GA Jr. Correlates of partial tooth loss and edentulism in the Brazilian elderly. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007 Jun;35(3):224-32. Hyland R, Ellis J, Thomason M, El-Feky A, Moynihan P. A qualitative study on patient perspectives of how conventional and implant-supported dentures affect eating. Journal of Dentistry 2009;37:718–23. Krennmair G, Ulm C. The symphyseal single-tooth implant for anchorage of a mandibular complete denture in geriatric patients: a clinical report. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 2001;16:98-104. Kronstrom M, Davis B, Loney R, Gerrow J, Hollender L. A prospective randomized study on the immediate loading of mandibular overdentures supported by one or two implants: a 12emonth follow-up report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:181-8. Liddelow GJ, Henry PJ. A prospective study of immediately loaded single implantretained mandibular overdentures: preliminary one-year results. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2007;97:S126–37. Maeda Y, Horisaka M, Yagi K. Biomechanical rationale for a single implantretained mandibular overdenture: an in vitro study. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2008;19:271–5. Medeiros JJ, Rodrigues LV, Azevedo AC, Lima Neto EA, Machado LS, Valença AMG. Edentulismo, uso e necessidade de prótese e fatores associados em município do nordeste brasileiro. Pesq Bras Odontoped Clin Integr. 2012 Out-Dez;12(4):573-78. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RH, Visser A. & Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2009;20: 722-8. Mericske-Stern R, Zarb GA. Overdentures: an alternative implant methodology for edentulous patients. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:203-8. Musacchio E, Perissinotto E, Binotto P, Sartori L, Silva-Netto F, Zambon S, Manzato E, Corti MC, Baggio G, Crepaldi G. Tooth loss in the elderly and its association with nutritional status, socio-economic and lifestyle factors. Acta Odontol Scand. 2007 Apr;65(2):78-86. Naert I, Alsaadi G & Quirynen M. Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implantretained mandibular overdentures: a 10-year randomized clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17:401-10. Oliveira AGRC. Edentulismo. In: Antunes JLF, Perez MA, editores. Epidemiologia da Saúde Bucal. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan; 2006. p. 205-18. Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, Stegenga B, van’t Hof MA, van Oort RP, Vissink A. Effectiveness of three treatment modalities for the edentulous mandible. A fiveyear randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:195–201. Rich B, Goldstein GR. New paradigms in prosthodontic treatment planning: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Aug;88(2):208-14. Slade GD, Nuttall N, Sanders AE, Steele JG, Allen PF, Lahti S. Impacts of oral disorders in the United Kingdom and Australia. Br Dent J. 2005 Apr 23;198(8):489-93. Smith B, Baysan A, Fenlon M. Association between oral health impact profile and general health scores for patients seeking dental implants. Journal of Dentistry 2009;37:357–9. Steele JG, Sanders AE, Slade GD, Allen PF, Lahti S, Nuttall N, Spencer AJ. How do age and tooth loss affect oral health impacts and quality of life? A study comparing two national samples. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004. Apr;32(2):107-14. Stoker G, Wismeijer D & van Waas M. An eight-year follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of aftercare and cost-analysis with three types of mandibular implant retained overdentures. Journal of Dental Research 2007;86: 276-80. Takanashi Y, Penrod JR, Lund JP, Feine JS. A cost comparison of mandibular two-implant overdenture and conventional denture treatment. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:181-6. Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, Ellis JS, Barclay C, Butterworth C, Scott B, Lynch C, Stewardson D, Smith P, Welfare R, Hyde P, McAndrew R, Fenlon M, Barclay S, Barker D. Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients – the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J. 2009 Aug 22;207(4):185-6. Timmerman R, Stoker GT, Wismeijer D, Oosterveld P, Vermeeren JIJF, van Waas MAJ. An eight-year follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of participant satisfaction with three types of mandibular implant-retained overdentures. J Dent Res 2004;83:630-3. Vargas AMD, Paixão HH. Perda dentária e seu significado na qualidade de vida de adultos usuários de serviço público de saúde bucal do Centro de Saúde Boa Vista em Belo Horizonte. Cien Saude Colet. 2006 Out-Dez;10(4):1015-24. Visser A, Meijer H, Raghoebar G & Vissink A. Implant-retainedmandibular overdentures versus conventional dentures: a 10 years of care and aftercare. International Journal of Prosthodontics 2006;19:271-8. Walton JN, Glick N, Macentee MI. A randomized clinical trial comparing patient satisfaction and prosthetic outcomes with mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. International Journal of Prosthodontics 2009;22:331-9. Wolfart S, Braasch K, Brunzel S, Kern M. The central single implant in the edentulous mandible: improvement of function and quality of life. A report of 2 cases. Quintessence Int 2008; 39:541-8. Zarb, G. & Bolender, C. (2004) Prosthodontic Treatment for Edentulous Patients. Complete Dentures and Implant-Supported Prostheses. 12th edition. St Louis: Mosby. |
Page generated in 0.0042 seconds