Literature DB >> 8297452

Torque required to loosen single-tooth implant abutment screws before and after simulated function.

L C Breeding1, D L Dixon, E W Nelson, J D Tietge.   

Abstract

The amount of torque required to loosen screws from three different antirotational screw-retained abutment/implant combinations was compared (with and without adhesive sealant applied) after 6 kg of force was applied during simulated intraoral movements. Movements were generated over two simulated time periods, representing 1 and 6 months. There was no significant decrease (alpha < .05) in the torque required to loosen the screws after either time period when using Calcitek Omnilock or Stryker Minimatic. The Core-Vent Bio-Vent specimens, however, exhibited a significant decrease (alpha < .05) in the amount of torque required to loosen the screws at the 1-month test period only. The addition of adhesive sealant significantly increased (alpha < .05) the amount of torque necessary to loosen the screws only in the Core-Vent specimens.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8297452

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Prosthodont        ISSN: 0893-2174            Impact factor:   1.681


  14 in total

1.  Removal torque evaluation of three different abutment screws for single implant restorations after mechanical cyclic loading.

Authors:  T Paepoemsin; P A Reichart; P Chaijareenont; F P Strietzel; P Khongkhunthian
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2016-11-16

2.  Complete mechanical characterization of an external hexagonal implant connection: in vitro study, 3D FEM, and probabilistic fatigue.

Authors:  María Prados-Privado; Sérgio A Gehrke; Rosa Rojo; Juan Carlos Prados-Frutos
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  Influence of the connection design and titanium grades of the implant complex on resistance under static loading.

Authors:  Su-Jung Park; Suk-Won Lee; Richard Leesungbok; Su-Jin Ahn
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 1.904

4.  Evaluation of stability of interface between CCM (Co-Cr-Mo) UCLA abutment and external hex implant.

Authors:  Ki-Joon Yoon; Young-Bum Park; Hyunmin Choi; Youngsung Cho; Jae-Hoon Lee; Keun-Woo Lee
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 1.904

5.  Comparative Evaluation of Retentive Properties of Two Compatible Ball Attachments in Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Maryam Memarian; Simindokht Zarrati; Sedigheh Karimi; Mehran Bahrami
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2018-03

Review 6.  Systematic analysis of factors that cause loss of preload in dental implants.

Authors:  S Nithyapriya; A S Ramesh; A Kirubakaran; Jeevitha Mani; J Raghunathan
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep

7.  Comparison of CAD/CAM abutment and prefabricated abutment in Morse taper internal type implant after cyclic loading: Axial displacement, removal torque, and tensile removal force.

Authors:  Yuseung Yi; Seong-Joo Heo; Jai-Young Koak; Seong-Kyun Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 1.904

8.  Influence of Implant Connection, Abutment Design and Screw Insertion Torque on Implant-Abutment Misfit.

Authors:  Jorge Vélez; Jesús Peláez; Carlos López-Suárez; Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Celia Tobar; María J Suárez
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 9.  Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant-Abutment Connections.

Authors:  Ana Sofia Vinhas; Carlos Aroso; Filomena Salazar; Paula López-Jarana; José Vicente Ríos-Santos; Mariano Herrero-Climent
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 10.  Technical complications of implant-causes and management: A comprehensive review.

Authors:  Swati Gupta; Hemant Gupta; Amrit Tandan
Journal:  Natl J Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015 Jan-Jun
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.