• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry >Biomechanical behavior of 2-implant– and single-implant–retained mandibular overdentures with conventional or mini implants
【24h】

Biomechanical behavior of 2-implant– and single-implant–retained mandibular overdentures with conventional or mini implants

机译：用常规或迷你植入物的2种植入物和单植入的下颌覆盖的生物力学行为

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Statement of problemThe use of single or mini dental implants to retain mandibular overdentures is still questionable. PurposeThe purpose of this finite element analysis (FEA) study was to investigate the biomechanical behavior of 2- and single-implant–retained mandibular overdentures with conventional or mini implants. Material and methodsFour 3-dimensional (3D) finite element models were constructed with the following designs of mandibular overdentures: 2 (group 2-C) and single (group 1-C) conventional external hexagon implants with ball or O-ring attachment and 2 (group 2-M) and single (group 1-M) 1-piece mini implants. A 150-N axial load was applied bilaterally and simultaneously on the first molar. Overdenture displacement, von Mises equivalent stress (implants and/or prosthetic components), and maximum principal stresses (peri-implant bone) were recorded numerically and then color-coded and compared among the groups. ResultsThe overdenture displacement (in mm) was higher for the 1-M (0.16) and 2-M (0.17) groups when compared with 1-C (0.09) and 2-C (0.08). Irrespective of the type of implant, the single-implant groups presented higher values of stress (in MPa) on the implants than did the 2-implant groups (1-C=52.53; 1-M=2.95; 2-C=34.66; 2-M=2.37), ball attachment (1-C=201.33; 2-C=159.06), housing or O-ring (1-C=125.01; 1-M=1.96; 2-C=88.84; 2-M=1.27), and peri-implant cortical bone (1-C=19.37; 1-M=1.47; 2-C=15.70; 2-M=1.06). The mini implant overdentures presented lower stress values on the implants, housing or O-ring, and peri-implant bone than did the conventional implant overdentures, regardless of the number of implants. ConclusionsThe 2-implant–retained overdentures exhibited lower stresses than the single- implant–retained overdentures, irrespective of the type of implant. The mini implants demonstrated higher overdenture displacement and lower stresses than did conventional implant overdentures for single- and 2-implant–retained overdentures.
机译：问题陈述使用单一或迷你牙科植入物保留下颌覆盖仍然是可疑的。这种有限元分析（FEA）研究的目的目的是研究用常规或迷你植入物的2-和单植入保留的下颌覆盖性的生物力学行为。用以下颌骨覆盖设计：2（第2 -C组）和单（第1-C组）和单圈附件和2的常规外六角植入物，构建了材料和方法的材料和方法。 （第2-M组）和单（1-M）1件式迷你植入物。双侧施加150n-n轴向载荷，并同时在第一摩尔上施用。覆盖位移，von MISES等效应力（植入物和/或假体组分），并且数值记录最大主要应力（PERI-植入骨），然后在组中进行颜色编码并比较。与1-C（0.09）和2-C（0.08）相比，1-M（0.16）和2-μm（0.17）组的1M（0.16）和2-mM（0.17）组的估计率（mM为单位）更高。无论植入物的类型如何，单植入族都会在植入物上呈现较高的应力（在MPa中）比2-植入基团（1-C = 52.53; 1-M = 2.95; 2-C = 34.66; 2-m = 2.37），球连接（1-C = 201.33; 2-C = 159.06），壳体或O形环（1-C = 125.01; 1-M = 1.96; 2-C = 88.84; 2-C = 1.27）和Peri-植入皮质骨（1-C = 19.37; 1-M = 1.47; 2-C = 15.70; 2-M = 1.06）。迷你植入物覆盖率呈现植入物，壳体或O形圈的较低的应力值，而不是传统的植入物覆盖物，而不管植入物的数量如何。结论2-植入物保留的过度显示出比单植入保留的覆盖的较低的应力，而不管植入物的类型如何。迷你植入物呈现出更高的过度位移和低应力，而不是常规植入物覆盖物用于单植入物保留的覆谱。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号