No abstract

No abstract

PURPOSE.To verify the influence of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) implantsupported prostheses manufactured with cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) and zirconia (Zr), and whether ceramic application, spark erosion, and simulation of masticatory cycles modify biomechanical parameters (marginal fit, screw-loosening torque, and strain) on the implant-supported system. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ten full-arch fixed frameworks were manufactured by a CAD/CAM milling system with Co-Cr and Zr (n=5/group). The marginal fit between the abutment and frameworks was measured as stated by single-screw test. Screw-loosening torque evaluated screw stability, and strain analysis was explored on the implant-supported system. All analyses were performed at 3 distinct times: after framework manufacturing; after ceramic application in both materials' frameworks; and after the spark erosion in Co-Cr frameworks. Afterward, stability analysis was re-evaluated after 10 6 mechanical cycles (2 Hz/150-N) for both materials. Statistical analyses were performed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (α=.05). RESULTS. No difference between the two materials was found for marginal fit, screwloosening torque, and strain after framework manufacturing (P>.05). Ceramic application did not affect the variables (P>.05). Spark erosion optimized marginal fit and strain medians for Co-Cr frameworks (P<.05). Screwloosening torque was significantly reduced by masticatory simulation (P<.05) regardless of the framework materials. CONCLUSION. Co-Cr and Zr frameworks presented similar biomechanical behavior. Ceramic application had no effect on the biomechanical behavior of either material. Spark erosion was an effective technique to improve Co-Cr biomechanical behavior on the implant-supported system. Screw-loosening torque was reduced for both materials after masticatory simulation.

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical behavior of implant-retained mandibular overdentures using Micro ERA® system with different implant position and angulation by finite element analysis (FEA). Methods: Four 3D finite element models of simplified mandibular overdentures were constructed, using one Bränemark implant with a Micro ERA® attachment. The implant was positioned on the canine or lateral incisor area with an angulation of either 0º (C-0º; LI-0º) or 17º (C-17º, LI-17º) to the vertical axis. A 100 N axial load was applied in one side simultaneously, from first premolar to second molar. In all models it was analyzed the overdenture displacement, compressive/tensile stress in the bone-implant interface, and also the von Mises equivalent stress for the nylon component of the housing. The stresses were obtained (numerically and color-coded) for further comparison among all the groups. Results: The displacement on the overdenture was higher at the posterior surface for all groups, especially in the C-17º group. When comparing the compressive/tensile stress in the bone-implant interface, the lateral-incisor groups (LI-0º and LI-17º) had the highest compressive and lowest tensile stress compared to the canine groups (C-0º and C-17º). The von Mises stress on the nylon component generated higher stress value for the LI-0º among all groups. Conclusions: The inclination and positioning of the implant in mandibular overdenture interferes directly in the stress distribution. The results showed that angulated implants had the highest displacement. While the implants placed in the lateral incisor position presented lower compressive and higher tensile stress respectively. For the attachment the canine groups had the lowest stress.

No abstract