SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.33 número2Evaluación del impacto de la Alianza por un Futuro Libre de Caries. Territorio demostrativo, comuna 20 de CaliRegeneración ósea en defectos calvariales de ratones NOD.CB17- Prkdcscid/J (NOD SCID) a partir de células madre de la pulpa dental: una revisión sistemática índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Revista Facultad de Odontología Universidad de Antioquia

versión impresa ISSN 0121-246X

Resumen

VELASQUEZ-RON, Byron; PACHECO, Luis; QUINTANA, Pablo  y  MENA, Alexandra. Evaluation of effort zones between custom implant sinterized and the prefabricated implant though photoelasticity. Rev Fac Odontol Univ Antioq [online]. 2021, vol.33, n.2, pp.31-41.  Epub 30-Jun-2022. ISSN 0121-246X.  https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfo.v33n2a4.

Introduction:

the use of custom implants is a very common treatment; we assess and compare their behavior against that of conventional implants. This study aimed to make sure that the stress zones of the custom implant are different from those presented by the conventional prefabricated implant by photoelasticity.

Methods:

we subjected samples of n=10 bicuspid teeth, n=10 sintered custom implants, and n=10 conventional prefabricated implants to 3 fixed and controlled forces and observed the samples through a polariscope to analyze the distributions of effort generated. The effort zones present in the different samples were analyzed under 3 different forces.

Results:

the amounts of effort in the two types of implants under force 1 (chi-square test, p=0.596) are different, as is also the case under force 2 (chi-square test, p=0.407). Under force 3 (Levene test, p=0.899), there is no difference in the distributions of effort between the two types of implants.

Conclusions:

it was determined that the conventional prefabricated implant distributes and concentrates the effort generated under different forces better than the sintered custom implant.

Palabras clave : dental stress analysis; prostheses and implants; bicuspid.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )