Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Masticatory performance with different types of rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible
Neves, Flávio Domingues; Mendes, Francielle Alves; Borges, Tânia de Freitas; Mendonça, Daniela Baccelli Silveira; Prado, Marisa Martins da Silva; Zancopé, Karla.
Affiliation
  • Neves, Flávio Domingues; Universidade Federal de Uberlândia. School of Dentistry. Department of Occlusion, Fixed Prosthodontics and Dental Materials. Uberlândia. BR
  • Mendes, Francielle Alves; Faculdade de Patos de Minas. School of Dentistry. Department of Prosthodontics. Patos de Minas. BR
  • Borges, Tânia de Freitas; Faculdade de Patos de Minas. School of Dentistry. Department of Prosthodontics. Patos de Minas. BR
  • Mendonça, Daniela Baccelli Silveira; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Laboratory of Bone Biology and Implant Therapy. Department of Prosthodontics. Chapel Hill. US
  • Prado, Marisa Martins da Silva; Universidade Federal de Uberlândia. Technical School of Dentistry. Uberlândia. BR
  • Zancopé, Karla; Universidade Federal de Uberlândia. School of Dentistry. Department of Occlusion, Fixed Prosthodontics and Dental Materials. Uberlândia. BR
Braz. j. oral sci ; 14(3): 186-189, July-Sept. 2015. tab, graf
Article de En | LILACS, BBO | ID: lil-770536
Bibliothèque responsable: BR218.1
ABSTRACT
Abstract

Aim:

To compare the masticatory performance associated with different rehabilitation strategies for patients with edentulous mandibles.

Methods:

one portion of the test food "Optocal" was provided to groups Natural Dentition (n = 15), Mandibular Fixed Implant-Supported Prosthesis with Maxillary Fixed Prosthesis (n = 8), Mandibular Fixed Implant-Supported Prosthesis with Maxillary Removable Prosthesis (n = 14), Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdenture with Maxillary Removable Prosthesis (n = 16), and Complete Dentures (n = 16). The portion was collected after 40 chewing strokes, and then passed through a stack of eight sieves with decreasing apertures. Masticatory performance was determined by weighing the portion of food on each sieve.

Results:

the masticatory performance was 71.00% for Natural Dentition, 41.57% for Mandibular Fixed Implant-Supported Prosthesis with Maxillary Fixed Prosthesis, 31.44% for Mandibular Fixed Implant-Supported Prosthesis with Maxillary Removable Prosthesis, 27.70% for Mandibular Implant-retained Overdenture, and 14.33% for Complete Dentures. The data were statistically compared using Student's t-test (p < 0.05). Natural Dentition and Complete Denture groups were statistically different from all other groups, with the Natural Dentition and Complete Denture groups exhibiting the highest and lowest masticatory performance values, respectively.

Conclusions:

Osseointegrated implants improved the masticatory performance of all implant-supported groups compared to the Complete Dentures group.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Indice: LILACS Sujet Principal: Prothèses et implants / Implants dentaires / Rétention de prothèse dentaire / Mastication Limites du sujet: Female / Humans / Male langue: En Texte intégral: Braz. j. oral sci Thème du journal: ODONTOLOGIA Année: 2015 Type: Article

Texte intégral: 1 Indice: LILACS Sujet Principal: Prothèses et implants / Implants dentaires / Rétention de prothèse dentaire / Mastication Limites du sujet: Female / Humans / Male langue: En Texte intégral: Braz. j. oral sci Thème du journal: ODONTOLOGIA Année: 2015 Type: Article