Retention and wear of precision-type attachments

Stewart, Barry L.; Edwards, R. O.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(83)90233-0

Cited by 35 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The retention force development is in accordance with results of other studies using artificial saliva for experimental wear set‐ups 6,18,31 . The high forces and especially the increase in the EN group are in accordance with previous wear tests using NaCl solution as lubricant 4,22 and seem not to be realistic for clinical behaviour of an attachment system. The rheological behaviour of saliva is determined by its mucin components as they reduce surface tension to moisten the intra‐oral surfaces.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, studies have shown that attachments of similar designs differed in wear mechanism and retention behavior 1,4,7,8,[10][11][12] . This in vitro study measured the changes in retention force of four types of attachment systems with different initial retention capacities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Precision attachments are similar to semi-precision attachments except that their components are manufactured to very tight tolerances and are held together by precise alignments. The retention of attachments is achieved through mechanical interlocking and frictional contact between the matrix and patrix 7,8) . With semi-precision attachments, matrices and patrices are usually cast components fabricated by using prefabricated plastic patterns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention behaviors of different attachment systems: Precious versus nonprecious, precision versus semi-precision

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to investigate the retention force changes of different attachment systems after 10,000 insertion-separation cycles and the difference in retention force between precious and non-precious materials of the same attachment system. Four types of attachments (Ball, Rod, M3 stud, and AP-Piccolino), produced using both precious and non-precious metal alloys, were tested (n=6). Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey's multiple comparison test, and t-test at a significance level of p≤0.05. Retention forces of all attachment types were significantly decreased after 10,000 insertion-separation cycles (p≤0.05). Rod and M3 attachment systems showed an initial increase in retention force, then an eventual decrease. At the end of the test, precious types of M3 and AP-Piccolino attachments had significantly higher retention force values than their non-precious ones (p≤0.05). Friction between non-precious attachment parts resulted in a higher retention loss than precious metal alloys.

show abstract

“…This system offers simplicity, low cost, self-adjustment, inherent stress-breaking, automatic repositioning after denture displacement, comparative freedom of lateral denture movement, and reduced trauma to retained roots and implants. [1][2][3][4][5][6] Additionally, it has been demonstrated that the magnetic fi eld does not affect the surrounding tissues. 7,8 Most magnetic attachments that are being applied currently are rare earth magnets that may corrode in the mouth, and this corrosion of the magnet might be one of the reasons for a reduction of the retentive force.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The change in retentive force of magnetic attachment by abrasion

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnets are frequently applied to removable dentures as retentive attachments. A magnet-retained removable overdenture might be slightly shifted from side to side by eccentric movement in the mouth, and the surface of magnetic attachment may be worn as a result. However, the relationship between the retentive force of magnetic attachment and its surface abrasion has not been reported. The purpose of this research is to investigate this relationship. Ten Mgfit DX 400 magnetic attachments for natural tooth roots were used for this experiment. The magnetic attachments were embedded in autopolymerizing acrylic resin, and ten pairs of specimens were fabricated. A 5-mm repeated gliding motion was applied on each pair of specimens until 30 000, 50 000, or 90 000 cycles had been achieved. The abrasion machine was under 5 kg loading, and the slide speed was 60 times/min. The retentive force of magnetic attachment was measured with a tension gauge at (1) before gliding; (2) after 30 000 gliding cycles; (3)after 50 000 gliding cycles; or (4) after 90 000 gliding cycles. The average change of retentive force of ten magnetic attachments after 30 000, 50 000, and 90 000 gliding cycles was 0.016 N, 0.003 N, and -0.008 N, respectively. The change was statistically analyzed using a paired-sample t test, which showed that the number of gliding cycles did not affect the retentive force of magnetic attachment significantly. The surface of magnetic attachment after gliding was observed by a microscope, and the abrasion of this attachment surface is clearly seen.

show abstract

Retention and wear of precision-type attachments

Cited by 35 publications

References 2 publications

Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments

Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments

Retention behaviors of different attachment systems: Precious versus nonprecious, precision versus semi-precision

The change in retentive force of magnetic attachment by abrasion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About