首页> 外文期刊>Clinical oral implants research >Evaluation of the marginal precision of one-piece complete arch titanium frameworks fabricated using five different methods for implant-supported restorations.
【24h】

Evaluation of the marginal precision of one-piece complete arch titanium frameworks fabricated using five different methods for implant-supported restorations.

机译:评估使用五种不同方法植入物支持的修复体制成的一件式完整足弓钛框架的边缘精度。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present work was to compare the marginal precision of titanium frameworks for a complete arch-fixed prosthesis fabricated using five different methods. METHODS: A prospective study was designed. Fifteen titanium frameworks for totally edentulous upper or lower jaws, each supported by five to nine implants, were assigned to five study groups, so as to have three frameworks in each group for each technique: (1) lost wax technique frameworks, (2) cast titanium sovrastructures laser welded to prefabricated titanium copings, (3) Procera Implant Bridge, (4) Cresco Ti System and (5) CAM StructSURE Precision Milled Bar. The microgap between the framework and the shoulders of implant analogues was measured on the master cast with a stereomicroscope at a magnification of 100 x at four different locations, yielding a total of 364 data points on 91 implants. Data were analyzed using an ANOVA and a Tukey post hoc test (P=0.05). RESULTS: The mean values for the microgap were 78 microm (SD+/-48) for lost wax technique frameworks, 33 microm (SD+/-19) for cast titanium sovrastructures laser welded to titanium copyings, 21 microm (SD+/-10) for the Procera implant bridge, 18 microm (SD+/-8) for the Cresco Ti System and 27 microm (SD+/-15) for the CAM StructSURE. The differences among the mean values were statistically significant (P0.01 or P0.05). The comparisons among groups 3, 4, and 5 and between groups 2 and 5 were not significant (P0.05). CONCLUSION: The computer-aided procedures analyzed in the present study were able to produce a precision-fitting framework, with no significant differences among them and, at the same time, showed a greater precision compared with the traditional casting methods or with the use of prefabricated titanium copings. However, it should be noted that, even if group 2 frameworks were not as accurate as groups 3 and 4, cast titanium sovrastructures laser welded to prefabricated titanium copings showed significantly better marginal precision than the frameworks produced with the lost wax technique.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较使用五种不同方法制造的完整的弓固定假体的钛框架的边缘精度。方法:设计了一项前瞻性研究。将五个完全无牙的上颌或下颌的钛框架(分别由五至九个植入物支撑)分配给五个研究组,以便每种技术在每个组中具有三个框架:(1)失蜡技术框架,(2)铸造钛金属复合材料激光焊接到预制的钛金属顶盖上,(3)Procera种植体桥,(4)Cresco Ti系统和(5)CAM StructSURE精密铣削棒。框架和植入物类似物肩部之间的微间隙是通过使用立体显微镜在原型铸模上在四个不同位置放大100倍来测量的,在91个植入物上总共产生364个数据点。使用方差分析和Tukey事后检验分析数据(P = <0.05)。结果:对于失蜡技术框架,微间隙的平均值为78微米(SD +/- 48),对于激光焊接到钛仿制件的铸造钛复合结构,微间隙的平均值为33微米(SD +/- 19),对于激光焊接的铸件钛合金微结构的平均值为21微米(SD +/- 10)。 Procera种植牙桥,Cresco Ti系统的直径为18微米(SD +/- 8),而CAM StructSURE的直径为27微米(SD +/- 15)。平均值之间的差异具有统计学意义(P <0.01或P <0.05)。第三,第四和第五组之间以及第二和第五组之间的比较无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。结论:本研究中分析的计算机辅助程序能够生成一个精确拟合的框架,它们之间没有显着差异,并且与传统的铸造方法或使用铸造方法相比,其精度更高。预制钛盖。但是,应该注意的是,即使第2组骨架不如第3组和第4组那样精确,激光焊接到预制钛顶盖的铸造钛复合结构也显示出比用失蜡技术生产的框架更好的边缘精度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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