Correlation of Fracture Resistance of Dental Implants and Bite Force in Dogs described in the literature: An In Vitro Study

被引:1
作者
Aramburu, Jaime Sarda [1 ,2 ]
Gehrke, Sergio Alexandre [2 ]
Dedavid, Berenice Anina [3 ]
Eilers Treichel, Tiago Luis [4 ]
Pippi, Ney Luis [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
[2] Biotecnos, Montevideo, Uruguay
[3] Pontificia Univ Catolica Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[4] Univ Rio Verde, Rio Verde, Go, Brazil
关键词
animal rehabilitation; dental implants; fracture mode; fracture strength; bite force; dog; in vitro; DIFFERENT CONNECTION DESIGNS; ANIMAL-MODELS; CROWN HEIGHT; CANINE TEETH; STRENGTH; BONE;
D O I
10.1177/08987564211044940
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
Dental implants are not routinely used for rehabilitation in veterinary dentistry. For some veterinarians, further studies are necessary to be considered for clinical use in animals. The objective of the present in vitro study was to evaluate static fatigue of dental implants and to correlate that with the bite strength of dogs described in the literature. Sixty implants and abutments were used with the smallest diameter of each brand of implant utilized in the study. Three groups (n = 20) were created on the basis of the implant diameter, all with external hex connector: 3.30 mm (group 1), 4.0 mm (group 2) and 5.0 mm (group 3). All groups were subjected to quasi-static loading at 30 degrees to the implant's long axis in a universal machine (model AME-5 kN). The mean fracture strength for group 1 was 964 +/- 187 N, for group 2 was 1618 +/- 149 N and for group 3 was 2595 +/- 161 N. Significant differences between the groups with respect to resistance after the load applications were observed (P < .05). The diameter of implants affects the resistance to external forces during the application of non-axial strength (off-axis loading) and must be considered during the planning of rehabilitation to avoid problems.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 80
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Albrektsson T, 1986, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V1, P11
  • [2] Brech C. le, 1997, Journal of Veterinary Dentistry, V14, P51
  • [3] Examination of the implant-abutment interface after fatigue testing
    Cibirka, RM
    Nelson, SK
    Lang, BR
    Rueggeberg, FA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2001, 85 (03) : 268 - 275
  • [4] Reattachment of tooth fragment:: An in vitro study
    Correa, Herbert Lima
    Rodrigues Filho, Leonardo Eloy
    Mello, Elaine Souza
    Carron, Renata Vanzo
    Gioso, Marco Antonio
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VETERINARY DENTISTRY, 2007, 24 (02) : 90 - 94
  • [5] Calibration of estimated biting forces in domestic canids:: comparison of post-mortem and in vivo measurements
    Ellis, Jennifer Lynn
    Thomason, Jeffrey J.
    Kebreab, Ermias
    France, James
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANATOMY, 2008, 212 (06) : 769 - 780
  • [6] Cranial dimensions and forces of biting in the domestic dog
    Ellis, Jennifer Lynn
    Thomason, Jeffrey
    Kebreab, Ermias
    Zubair, Kasim
    France, James
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANATOMY, 2009, 214 (03) : 362 - 373
  • [7] Importance of Crown Height Ratios in Dental Implants on the Fracture Strength of Different Connection Designs: An In Vitro Study
    Gehrke, Sergio Alexandre
    [J]. CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2015, 17 (04) : 790 - 797
  • [8] Influence of bone insertion level of the implant on the fracture strength of different connection designs: an in vitro study
    Gehrke, Sergio Alexandre
    dos Santos Vianna, Miriam Souza
    Dedavid, Berenice Anina
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2014, 18 (03) : 715 - 720
  • [9] The Influence of Force Direction on the Fracture Pattern and Fracture Resistance of Canine Teeth in Dogs
    Goldschmidt, Stephanie
    Zimmerman, Catherine
    Collins, Caitlyn
    Hetzel, Scott
    Ploeg, Heidi-Lynn
    Soukup, Jason W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VETERINARY DENTISTRY, 2017, 34 (01) : 8 - 17
  • [10] Micromotion and dynamic fatigue properties of the denial implant-abutment interface
    Gratton, DG
    Aquilino, SA
    Stanford, CM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2001, 85 (01) : 47 - 52