Novel nonmagnetic abutment designs for facial prostheses: an experimental study.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-10-14 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.55730/1300-0144.5953
İrem Sözen Yanik, Ufuk Adali, Jamila Yassine, Franziska Schmidt, Wolfgang Hannak, Bahadır Ersu
{"title":"Novel nonmagnetic abutment designs for facial prostheses: an experimental study.","authors":"İrem Sözen Yanik, Ufuk Adali, Jamila Yassine, Franziska Schmidt, Wolfgang Hannak, Bahadır Ersu","doi":"10.55730/1300-0144.5953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>This in vitro study was undertaken with the aim of evaluating and comparing the retentive forces of novel nonmagnetic abutment designs developed as alternatives to conventional magnetic abutments for facial prostheses.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A plexiglass model was constructed and two extraoral implants were placed in these blocks in a parallel position. Nonmagnetic abutments made of titanium were fabricated and screwed onto the implants. The nonmagnetic systems represent a novel design and include two different abutment designs (type 1 and type 2) with silicone attachments. Retentive force values for the three abutment types of a conventional magnetic system (CMS), the nonmagnetic abutment type 1 system (NMS1), and the nonmagnetic abutment type 2 system (NMS2) were measured at the 0th, 120th, 360th, 720th, and 1440th dislodging cycles using a test machine. Given the data's distribution characteristics, nonparametric tests were used for analysis. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to evaluate significant differences among groups, followed by Dunn's posthoc test for specific group comparisons. The Friedman test compared the number of dislodging cycles for each group, and the Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted Wilcoxon sign-rank test was used for pairwise comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both NMS1 and NMS2 exhibited significantly higher retentive forces compared to CMS for the same dislodging cycles (p < 0.01). The NMS1 group showed the highest initial retentive force (9.98 ± 0.89 N), followed by the NMS2 group (9.65 ± 0.35 N), but this difference was not statistically significant. Significant differences in retention force values were observed among the three groups across the dislodging cycles (p < 0.001). The lowest retentive force in the last dislodging cycle was observed in the CMS group (3.39 ± 0.04 N). Additionally, the retention forces decreased in all groups with each increasing dislodging cycle.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two newly developed nonmagnetic systems displayed higher retentive forces compared to the magnetic systems and can be considered viable alternative abutment options for facial prostheses.</p>","PeriodicalId":23361,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"55 1","pages":"152-160"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11913502/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55730/1300-0144.5953","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aim: This in vitro study was undertaken with the aim of evaluating and comparing the retentive forces of novel nonmagnetic abutment designs developed as alternatives to conventional magnetic abutments for facial prostheses.

Materials and methods: A plexiglass model was constructed and two extraoral implants were placed in these blocks in a parallel position. Nonmagnetic abutments made of titanium were fabricated and screwed onto the implants. The nonmagnetic systems represent a novel design and include two different abutment designs (type 1 and type 2) with silicone attachments. Retentive force values for the three abutment types of a conventional magnetic system (CMS), the nonmagnetic abutment type 1 system (NMS1), and the nonmagnetic abutment type 2 system (NMS2) were measured at the 0th, 120th, 360th, 720th, and 1440th dislodging cycles using a test machine. Given the data's distribution characteristics, nonparametric tests were used for analysis. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to evaluate significant differences among groups, followed by Dunn's posthoc test for specific group comparisons. The Friedman test compared the number of dislodging cycles for each group, and the Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted Wilcoxon sign-rank test was used for pairwise comparisons.

Results: Both NMS1 and NMS2 exhibited significantly higher retentive forces compared to CMS for the same dislodging cycles (p < 0.01). The NMS1 group showed the highest initial retentive force (9.98 ± 0.89 N), followed by the NMS2 group (9.65 ± 0.35 N), but this difference was not statistically significant. Significant differences in retention force values were observed among the three groups across the dislodging cycles (p < 0.001). The lowest retentive force in the last dislodging cycle was observed in the CMS group (3.39 ± 0.04 N). Additionally, the retention forces decreased in all groups with each increasing dislodging cycle.

Conclusion: The two newly developed nonmagnetic systems displayed higher retentive forces compared to the magnetic systems and can be considered viable alternative abutment options for facial prostheses.

新型非磁性义肢基台设计的实验研究。
背景/目的:本体外研究的目的是评估和比较新型非磁性基台设计作为传统磁性基台的面部修复替代品的固位力。材料和方法:制作有机玻璃模型,将两个口外种植体平行放置在这些块中。制作钛制成的非磁性基台并将其螺钉固定在种植体上。非磁性系统代表了一种新颖的设计,包括两种不同的基台设计(1型和2型)与硅胶附件。利用试验机测量了常规磁性基台(CMS)、非磁性基台1型(NMS1)和非磁性基台2型(NMS2)三种基台在第0、120、360、720和1440次位移循环时的固位力值。考虑到数据的分布特点,采用非参数检验进行分析。采用Kruskal-Wallis检验评价组间显著性差异,采用Dunn’s post - thoc检验进行特定组间比较。Friedman检验比较各组的移位周期数,并使用Benjamini-Hochberg调整的Wilcoxon符号-rank检验进行两两比较。结果:NMS1和NMS2在相同脱位周期内的固位力均显著高于CMS (p < 0.01)。NMS1组的初始固位力最高(9.98±0.89 N), NMS2组次之(9.65±0.35 N),但差异无统计学意义。在移位周期中,三组的固位力值有显著差异(p < 0.001)。CMS组在最后一个脱位周期的固位力最低(3.39±0.04 N),且随脱位周期的增加,各组固位力均呈下降趋势。结论:两种新开发的非磁性系统具有比磁性系统更高的固位力,是一种可行的面部修复基台替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Turkish Journal of Medical sciences is a peer-reviewed comprehensive resource that provides critical up-to-date information on the broad spectrum of general medical sciences. The Journal intended to publish original medical scientific papers regarding the priority based on the prominence, significance, and timeliness of the findings. However since the audience of the Journal is not limited to any subspeciality in a wide variety of medical disciplines, the papers focusing on the technical  details of a given medical  subspeciality may not be evaluated for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信