Résumé
Objetivo: Comparar dos procedimientos de soldadura convencionales empleando una aleación de Cr-Co, para co- nectar barras coladas seccionadas a ser fijadas sobre implantes. Materiales y métodos: A partir de un modelo maes- tro que representa un maxilar desdentado con cuatro implan- tes, se confeccionaron veinte (n=20) probetas seccionadas en tres partes. Se conformaron dos grupos, cada uno con diez (n=10) ejemplares. Una vez acondicionadas, fueron atornilla- das al modelo maestro. Su desajuste inicial se analizó utili- zando una lupa estereoscópica, con una cámara incorporada y un software. Las partes fueron soldadas empleando un pro- cedimiento diferente para cada grupo. Las correspondientes al Grupo I se invistieron en un block refractario a base de sílico-fosfato. Las del Grupo II se montaron en una estructu- ra metálica Clever Spider. El desajuste fue mensurado y los resultados procesados estadísticamente. El nivel de significa- ción fue establecido en p<0,05. Resultados: El Grupo I tuvo un desajuste inicial de 97,30±13,81µm y el Grupo II de 98,53±11,24µm. Luego de la soldadura, el Grupo I registró 98,53±17,17µm, 1,23µm mayor respecto al inicial. En el Grupo II se observó 103,13±17,61µm, 4,60µm por encima del original. Se analizaron mediante prue- ba t de Student; en ambos casos el resultado fue de p>0,05. Al comparar entre sí los grupos I y II, por medio de la prueba t y de comprobación no paramétrica de Mann-Whitney, se ob- servaron diferencias no significativas, p=0,41 y p=0,38 res- pectivamente (AU)
Aim: Compare two conventional welding procedures us- ing a Cr-Co alloy, to connect sectioned cast bars to be fixed on implants. Materials and methods: From a master model representing a toothless jaw with four implants, twenty (n=20) specimens sectioned into three parts were made. Two groups were formed, each with ten (n=10) specimens. Once conditioned, they were screwed to the master mod- el. Its initial mismatch was analyzed using a stereoscop- ic magnifier, with a built-in camera and a software. The parts were welded using a different procedure for each group. Those corresponding to Group I were invested in a refractory block based on silyl-phosphate. Those of Group II were mounted on a Clever Spider metal structure. The mismatch was measured, and the results processed statisti- cally. The level of significance was established at p<0.05. Results: Group I had an initial mismatch of 97.30 ±13.81µm, and Group II of 98.53±11.24µm. After welding, Group I registered 98.53±17.17µm, 1.23µm higher than the initial one. In Group II, 103.13±17.61µm was observed, 4.60µm above the original. They were analyzed using Stu- dent's t test; in both cases the result was p>0.05. When com- paring groups I and II, using the t-test and the Mann-Whitney nonparametric verification, non-significant differences were observed, p=0.41 and p=0.38 respectively. Conclusions: Under the conditions of this study, it was ob- served that the two welding methods analyzed were reliable for joining metallic superstructures without affecting their final fit (AU)
Sujets)
Soudage dentaire , Rétention de prothèse dentaire/méthodes , Essayage de prothèse/méthodes , Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée/méthodes , Interprétation statistique de données , Alliages de chrome/synthèse chimique , OverdentureRésumé
Resumen Objetivo Comparar dos procedimientos de soldadura convencionales empleando una aleación de Cr-Co, para conectar barras coladas seccionadas a ser fijadas sobre implantes. Materiales y métodos A partir de un modelo maestro que representa un maxilar desdentado con cuatro implantes, se confeccionaron veinte (n=20) probetas seccionadas en tres partes. Se conformaron dos grupos, cada uno con diez (n=10) ejemplares. Una vez acondicionadas, fueron atornilladas al modelo maestro. Su desajuste inicial se analizó utilizando una lupa estereoscópica, con una cámara incorporada y un software. Las partes fueron soldadas empleando un procedimiento diferente para cada grupo. Las correspondientes al Grupo I se invistieron en un block refractario a base de sílico-fosfato. Las del Grupo II se montaron en una estructura metálica Clever Spider. El desajuste fue mensurado y los resultados procesados estadísticamente. El nivel de significación fue establecido en p<0,05. Resultados El Grupo I tuvo un desajuste inicial de 97,30±13,81μm y el Grupo II de 98,53±11,24μm. Luego de la soldadura, el Grupo I registró 98,53±17,17μm, 1,23μm mayor respecto al inicial. En el Grupo II se observó 103,13±17,61μm, 4,60μm por encima del original. Se analizaron mediante prueba t de Student; en ambos casos el resultado fue de p>0,05. Al comparar entre sí los grupos I y II, por medio de la prueba t y de comprobación no paramétrica de Mann-Whitney, se observaron diferencias no significativas, p=0,41 y p=0,38 respectivamente. Conclusiones Bajo las condiciones de este estudio, se observó que los dos métodos de soldadura analizados fueron confiables para unir supraestructurasos metálicas sin que se afecte su ajuste final.
Abstract Aim Compare two conventional welding procedures using a Cr-Co alloy, to connect sectioned cast bars to be fixed on implants. Materials and methods From a master model representing a toothless jaw with four implants, twenty (n=20) specimens sectioned into three parts were made. Two groups were formed, each with ten (n=10) specimens. Once conditioned, they were screwed to the master model. Its initial mismatch was analyzed using a stereoscopic magnifier, with a built-in camera and a software. The parts were welded using a different procedure for each group. Those corresponding to Group I were invested in a refractory block based on silyl-phosphate. Those of Group II were mounted on a Clever Spider metal structure. The mismatch was measured, and the results processed statistically. The level of significance was established at p<0.05. Results Group I had an initial mismatch of 97.30 ±13.81μm, and Group II of 98.53±11.24μm. After welding, Group I registered 98.53±17.17μm, 1.23μm higher than the initial one. In Group II, 103.13±17.61μm was observed, 4.60μm above the original. They were analyzed using Student's t test; in both cases the result was p>0.05. When comparing groups I and II, using the t-test and the Mann-Whitney nonparametric verification, non-significant differences were observed, p=0.41 and p=0.38 respectively. Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, it was observed that the two welding methods analyzed were reliable for joining metallic superstructures without affecting their final fit.
Résumé
Resumen Objetivo Comparar dos procedimientos de soldadura convencionales empleando una aleación de Cr-Co, para conectar barras coladas seccionadas a ser fijadas sobre implantes. Materiales y métodos A partir de un modelo maestro que representa un maxilar desdentado con cuatro implantes, se confeccionaron veinte (n=20) probetas seccionadas en tres partes. Se conformaron dos grupos, cada uno con diez (n=10) ejemplares. Una vez acondicionadas, fueron atornilladas al modelo maestro. Su desajuste inicial se analizó utilizando una lupa estereoscópica, con una cámara incorporada y un software. Las partes fueron soldadas empleando un procedimiento diferente para cada grupo. Las correspondientes al Grupo I se invistieron en un block refractario a base de sílico-fosfato. Las del Grupo II se montaron en una estructura metálica Clever Spider. El desajuste fue mensurado y los resultados procesados estadísticamente. El nivel de significación fue establecido en p<0,05. Resultados El Grupo I tuvo un desajuste inicial de 97,30±13,81μm y el Grupo II de 98,53±11,24μm. Luego de la soldadura, el Grupo I registró 98,53±17,17μm, 1,23μm mayor respecto al inicial. En el Grupo II se observó 103,13±17,61μm, 4,60μm por encima del original. Se analizaron mediante prueba t de Student; en ambos casos el resultado fue de p>0,05. Al comparar entre sí los grupos I y II, por medio de la prueba t y de comprobación no paramétrica de Mann-Whitney, se observaron diferencias no significativas, p=0,41 y p=0,38 respectivamente. Conclusiones Bajo las condiciones de este estudio, se observó que los dos métodos de soldadura analizados fueron confiables para unir supraestructurasos metálicas sin que se afecte su ajuste final.
Abstract Aim Compare two conventional welding procedures using a Cr-Co alloy, to connect sectioned cast bars to be fixed on implants. Materials and methods From a master model representing a toothless jaw with four implants, twenty (n=20) specimens sectioned into three parts were made. Two groups were formed, each with ten (n=10) specimens. Once conditioned, they were screwed to the master model. Its initial mismatch was analyzed using a stereoscopic magnifier, with a built-in camera and a software. The parts were welded using a different procedure for each group. Those corresponding to Group I were invested in a refractory block based on silyl-phosphate. Those of Group II were mounted on a Clever Spider metal structure. The mismatch was measured, and the results processed statistically. The level of significance was established at p<0.05. Results Group I had an initial mismatch of 97.30 ±13.81μm, and Group II of 98.53±11.24μm. After welding, Group I registered 98.53±17.17μm, 1.23μm higher than the initial one. In Group II, 103.13±17.61μm was observed, 4.60μm above the original. They were analyzed using Student's t test; in both cases the result was p>0.05. When comparing groups I and II, using the t-test and the Mann-Whitney nonparametric verification, non-significant differences were observed, p=0.41 and p=0.38 respectively. Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, it was observed that the two welding methods analyzed were reliable for joining metallic superstructures without affecting their final fit.
Résumé
Objetivo: Comparar la precisión marginal de cofias de zirconia elaboradas empleando dos sistemas CAD/CAM Cerec InLab (Sirona®) y Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®) y un sistema pantográfi co Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®). Material y métodos: Se elaboró un muñón maestro de Cr-Co con preparación para corona de zirconia de un premolar superior. Se fabricaron 10 cofias de zirconia por grupo siguiendo los parámetros de cada sistema. El grupo control consistió en 10 cofias metálicas. Se ejecutó una técnica de réplica, utilizando polivinilsiloxano elite HD+ (Zhermack®). Mediante observación estereomicroscópica con aumento de 50x, se determinó en micras la discrepancia marginal absoluta y el espesor marginal de un punto por cara de cada cofia. El análisis estadístico se ejecutó con el software IBM SPSS®. Para comparar los datos obtenidos se realizó el test t. Resultados: La discrepancia marginal absoluta media y el espesor marginal fue 92.14 ± 38.59 y 78.62 ± 31.33 μm para el sistema CAD/CAM Cerec InLab (Sirona®), 38.71 ± 12.62 y 36.91 ± 13.56 μm para el sistema CAD/CAM Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®), 77.92 ± 38.01 y 69.42 ± 33.23 μm para el sistema pantográfico Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®) y 44.11 ± 15.36 y 43.74 ± 15.70 μm para el grupo control. Existieron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los sistemas Cerec InLab (Sirona®) y Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®) en comparación con el grupo control para la discrepancia marginal absoluta y el espesor marginal. No existieron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los sistemas CAD/CAM Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®) y el grupo control. El nivel de significancia fue p > 0.001. Conclusiones: El sistema más preciso fue CAD/CAM Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®). El sistema que mostró menor precisión marginal fue Cerec InLab (Sirona®).
Objective: To compare marginal fit of zirconia copings manufactured following two different systems: CAD/CAM Cerec InLab (Sirona®) and Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®) as well as a Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®) pantograph system. Material and methods: A master Cr-Co model stump was manufactured; it was prepared for the zirconia crown of an upper premolar. Ten zirconia copings were manufactured for each group following manufacturer¿s instructions. Control group consisted on ten metallic copings. A replication technique was followed using elite HD+ polyvinyl siloxane (Zhermack®). Measurements were taken using a stereomicroscope at 50x magnification so as to obtain marginal width in microns and thus determine absolute marginal discrepancy of each coping. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS® software. T-test study was conducted in order to compare obtained data. Results: Mean marginal absolute discrepancy and marginal width were as follows: 92.14 ± 38.59 and 78.62 ± 31.33 μm for Cerec InLab (Sirona®) CAD/CAM system, 38.71 ± 12.62 and 36.91 ± 13.56 μm for Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®) CAD/CAM system, 77.92 ± 38.01 and 69.42 ± 33.23 μm for Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®) pantograph system. Control group made of metal copings exhibited 44.11 ± 15.36 and 43.74 ± 15.70 μm. With respect to absolute marginal discrepancy and marginal width, significant differences were observed when comparing Cerec InLab (Sirona®) and Zirkograph 025 ECO (Zirkonzahn®) with control group. Nevertheless, no significant differences were observed between Zirkonzahn (Zirkonzahn®) CAD/CAM system and the control group. Overall level of statistical significance was p > 0.001. Conclusions: Zirkonzahn® CAD/CAM system was the most accurate system of all. CAD/CAM Cerec InLab system (Sirona®) proved to be the less precise system.
Résumé
O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar o efeito de diferentes tratamentos de superfície da cerâmica Y-TZP na resistência de união, durabilidade e discrepância marginal. Para os testes de resistência adesiva, foram obtidos 144 corpos de prova (cp) da cerâmica VITA In-Ceram YZ for InLab (5,25 x 3,75 x 4,5 mm), que foram divididos em 6 grupos (G) (n=24), conforme o tratamento de superfície: G1: sem tratamento (controle); G2: jateamento com partículas de alumínio revestidas por sílica (CoJet®-Sand, 3M ESPE AG) (silicatização); G3: vitrificação 1 (Glaze Spray VITA AKZENT), condicionamento com ácido fluorídrico (HF) (1 min); G4: vitrificação 1 (Glaze Spray VITA AKZENT), silicatização; G5: vitrificação 2 (Glaze VITA AKZENT), condicionamento com HF (1 min); G6: vitrificação 2 (Glaze VITA AKZENT), silicatização. Após todos os tratamentos, as superfícies foram silanizadas por 5 min (ESPE-SIL) e a cimentação com Panavia F (Kuraray) foi realizada. Metade dos espécimes de cada tratamento foi ensaiada 24h após cimentação (SECO), a outra metade foi submetida à armazenagem (150 dias) e termociclagem (12.000x) (TC), e então realizado o ensaio de cisalhamento (1 mm/min). G7: G1+TC; G8: G2+TC; G9: G3+TC; G10: G4+TC; G11: G5+TC; G12: G6+TC. Superfícies tratadas foram analisadas por perfilometria óptica 3D para obtenção dos dados de rugosidade (Ra) e microscopia eletrônica de varredura (MEV) (1000x). Análise por energia dispersiva de raio-X (EDS) foi realizada para determinar os elementos químicos presentes na superfície de cada grupo. Para a análise de adaptação marginal foram confeccionadas 60 infraestruturas (adaptadas em um troquel metálico) nas quais foram realizados os mesmos tratamentos de superfície. Os dados obtidos foram analisados estatisticamente. Constata-se que tanto na condição Seco como na condição TC os grupos que receberam tratamento de superfície via vitrificação (vitrificação 1 e vitrificação 2) apresentaram mais alta resistência de união comparada ao grupo...
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments of Y-TZP ceramic on bond durability and marginal fit. 144 specimens of VITA In-Ceram YZ for InLab ceramic (5.25 x 3.75 x 4.5 mm) were obtained and divided into 6 groups (n=24) according to the surface treatment: G1: no treatment (control); G2: chairside tribochemical silica coating system (CoJet®-Sand, 3M ESPE AG) (Cojet); G3: vitrification 1 (Glaze Spray VITA AKZENT), conditioning with hydrofluoric acid (HF) (1 minute); G4: vitrification 1 (Glaze Spray VITA AKZENT), Cojet; G5: vitrification 2 (Glaze VITA AKZENT), conditioning with HF (1 minute); G6: vitification 2 (Glaze VITA AKZENT), Cojet. Then, the ceramic surfaces were silanized and the cement Panavia F (Kuraray) was applied. Half of the specimens from each treatment was tested 24 hours after cementation (DRY), the remaining specimens were stored in distilled water for150 days, thermocycled(12,000x) (AGING) and then the shear test was performed (1mm/minute). Conditioned surfaces were evaluated by 3D optical profilometry in order to obtain roughness data (Ra) and analysed by scan electronic microscopy (SEM) (1000x). Analysis by energy x-ray dispersive (EDS) was performed to determine the chemical elements present in each surface group. For analysis of marginal adaptation 60 crowns were produced (adapted into a metal die) and the same surface treatments were carried out on the internal surface of the crowns. The data were analysed using. The results suggest the vitrification 1 and vitrification 2 groups showed the highest bond strength compared to the control group. The highest marginal discrepancies were observed in the vitrification groups (117.36±29.61 to 105.78±12.23) comparing with the other groups (55.29±8.71 and 55.04±8.55). The proposed new surface treatment changed the Y-TZP ceramic morphology improving its adhesion to the resin cement...