Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)

The presence of a free end a removable partial dentures involves a major problem in the clinic. In fact it is known that there is difficulty in treating multiplying by 2.5 the risk of complications. The gaps without posterior abutment are difficult to restore later, require a support tooth and mucos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dib, V. N., Baino, M. A., De Leonardi, G.
Formato: Artículo revista
Lenguaje:Español
Publicado: Facultad de Odontología 2019
Materias:
Prosthesis
Partial
Removable
Attachment
Retention
Traction
Prótesis
Parcial
Removible
Attaches
Retención
Tracción
Acceso en línea:https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/RevFacOdonto/article/view/23859
Aporte de:
Revista de la Facultad de Odontología de Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
id I10-R335-article-23859
record_format ojs
spelling I10-R335-article-238592019-04-01T11:12:59Z Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1) Análisis comparativo de diferentes sistemas de retenedores de precisión (Parte 1) Dib, V. N. Baino, M. A. De Leonardi, G. Prosthesis Partial Removable Attachment Retention Traction Prótesis Parcial Removible Attaches Retención Tracción The presence of a free end a removable partial dentures involves a major problem in the clinic. In fact it is known that there is difficulty in treating multiplying by 2.5 the risk of complications. The gaps without posterior abutment are difficult to restore later, require a support tooth and mucosa.The oral mucosa and the ligament periodontal of the abutments teeth respond differently to the loads. This difference in behavior of teeth and mucosa is what has led to the design of removable partial dentures to be rigid or resilient characteristics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retention of various types of attachments subjected to traction. On this experimental work were analyzed three extracoronaries precision attachments to determine and compare their behavior in bilateral distal toothless maxilla (Kennedy Class I). The systems were Rod attachment, Strategy and Anker System. For the realization of the various tests, it was used three experimental models partially toothless Class I Kennedy maxilla. These models were used to determine the retention capacity of each type of attachment.The results showed that the traction, these behaviors differ in the maximum load reached; being Anker System (p=0,0030) remains the largest tensil traction followed by the Rod attachment and then Strategy. La presencia de un extremo libre en prótesis parcial removible implica un problema importante en la clínica. Existe una dificultad en el tratamiento multiplicando por 2,5 el riesgo de aparición de complicaciones.Las brechas sin pilar posterior son difíciles de restaurar, requieren de un soporte dentario y otro mucoso. La mucosa oral y el ligamento periodontal de los elementos dentarios pilares responden de manera diferente a las cargas. Esta diferencia de comportamiento de dientes y mucosa ha conducido a la clasificación de las prótesis parciales removibles con características rígidas o resilientes. El propósito de este estudio fue, evaluar la retención de diferentes sistemas de fijadores extracoronarios sometidos a puebas de tracción. Se analizaron tres fijadroes extracoronarios de precisión para determinar y comparar su comportamiento en desdentados bilaterales posteriores (clase I de Kennedy) en maxilar superior. Los sistemas utilizados fueron Rod attachment (RA), Strategy (S), y Anker System (AS). Para la realización de las pruebas de tracción, se utilizaron tres modelos experimentales de maxilar superior parcialmente desdentados Clase I de Kennedy para determinar la capacidad retentiva de cada tipo de atache. Se observó que a la tracción, los comportamientos difieren en cuanto a la carga máxima alcanzada; siendo para el Anker System mayor la resistencia a la tracción (p=0,0030) seguido por Rod Attachment y Strategy. Facultad de Odontología 2019-03-30 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion application/pdf https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/RevFacOdonto/article/view/23859 Revista de la Facultad de Odontología; Vol. 29 Núm. 1 (2019); 22-28 2545-7594 0325-1071 spa https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/RevFacOdonto/article/view/23859/23410
institution Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
institution_str I-10
repository_str R-335
container_title_str Revista de la Facultad de Odontología
language Español
format Artículo revista
topic Prosthesis
Partial
Removable
Attachment
Retention
Traction
Prótesis
Parcial
Removible
Attaches
Retención
Tracción
spellingShingle Prosthesis
Partial
Removable
Attachment
Retention
Traction
Prótesis
Parcial
Removible
Attaches
Retención
Tracción
Dib, V. N.
Baino, M. A.
De Leonardi, G.
Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
topic_facet Prosthesis
Partial
Removable
Attachment
Retention
Traction
Prótesis
Parcial
Removible
Attaches
Retención
Tracción
author Dib, V. N.
Baino, M. A.
De Leonardi, G.
author_facet Dib, V. N.
Baino, M. A.
De Leonardi, G.
author_sort Dib, V. N.
title Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
title_short Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
title_full Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (Part 1)
title_sort comparative analysis of different precision retainer systems (part 1)
description The presence of a free end a removable partial dentures involves a major problem in the clinic. In fact it is known that there is difficulty in treating multiplying by 2.5 the risk of complications. The gaps without posterior abutment are difficult to restore later, require a support tooth and mucosa.The oral mucosa and the ligament periodontal of the abutments teeth respond differently to the loads. This difference in behavior of teeth and mucosa is what has led to the design of removable partial dentures to be rigid or resilient characteristics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retention of various types of attachments subjected to traction. On this experimental work were analyzed three extracoronaries precision attachments to determine and compare their behavior in bilateral distal toothless maxilla (Kennedy Class I). The systems were Rod attachment, Strategy and Anker System. For the realization of the various tests, it was used three experimental models partially toothless Class I Kennedy maxilla. These models were used to determine the retention capacity of each type of attachment.The results showed that the traction, these behaviors differ in the maximum load reached; being Anker System (p=0,0030) remains the largest tensil traction followed by the Rod attachment and then Strategy.
publisher Facultad de Odontología
publishDate 2019
url https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/RevFacOdonto/article/view/23859
work_keys_str_mv AT dibvn comparativeanalysisofdifferentprecisionretainersystemspart1
AT bainoma comparativeanalysisofdifferentprecisionretainersystemspart1
AT deleonardig comparativeanalysisofdifferentprecisionretainersystemspart1
AT dibvn analisiscomparativodediferentessistemasderetenedoresdeprecisionparte1
AT bainoma analisiscomparativodediferentessistemasderetenedoresdeprecisionparte1
AT deleonardig analisiscomparativodediferentessistemasderetenedoresdeprecisionparte1
first_indexed 2024-09-03T21:15:23Z
last_indexed 2024-09-03T21:15:23Z
_version_ 1809211062582509568

Ejemplares similares